The confusing layout of the new bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road in Bethesda continues to baffle some drivers, and their vehicular forays into them raise safety issues for cyclists. It's the southbound segment between Tuckerman Lane and Democracy Boulevard that has serious design issues, which seem to tempt some drivers to enter the cycling zone, and - worst of all - allow them to do so. Drivers seeking to turn right onto Rock Spring Drive and Democracy Boulevard are most often the unwitting victims.
86 comments:
They will never be taken down. They are very, very seldom used. The traffic has indeed been negatively affected. Fact. The back up was never what it's been after closing an entire lane. Yes, it's summer now but when folks come back to school, etc, it'll be horrible and even during non-rush. Anti-car agenda period. Keep up the votes for Elrich & Co. You deserve what you get. Think Old Geo'twn is bad? Wait for the other popular corridors where wacko ideas like this will be implemented. They don't give two bleeps about you. Want proof? An overwhelming number of people, including a local town mayor, and the threat of lawsuits, and they go ahead and ruin a beautiful drive on Little Falls anyway. What's on the closed section now? Very few people and mostly overgrowth and fallen trees. They don't want you in a car at all.
Grab your bike instead. Get it?
Funny, just yesterday I had a close call on my bike right along there, a driver came racing up behind me blaring their horn as I (legally) rode thru the exit.
Maybe the ivy-league road planners in Rockville will close another lane in the name of safety!
This really just goes to show how incompetent a lot of Maryland drivers are. This is why driving tests exist. If you find yourself driving in a bike lane like this and no alarm bells are going off in your brain then you really shouldn’t be driving at all. You are a danger to everyone else on the road.
We have seen only 4 bike riders since the lanes have been open. We're there every day.
It's hard to imagine how anyone could be confused by the blizzard of vertical and diagonal markings, plus the forest of reflective vertical pylons --clearly, someone at MD DoT got a bulk deal on those sticks-- that vie for attention on that stretch of Old George. I have been driving for more than four decades --knock on wood, the last traffic ticket I got was in 1983-- and every time I hit that portion of OGT my heart races, anxious somebody is going to get confused in that labyrinth and wind up causing a wreck. It looks like it was designed by an eighth-grader.
Slightly off topic, but analogous: several studies have been conducted by different organizations to determine the safest, most effective use of emergency lighting at night for first responder vehicles stationary at a scene. Contrary to what many would suspect, (and what many departments display on their vehicles,) researchers determined a slow, steady pulse of ca. 70 flashes/minute with large blocks of single-colored lights, rather than a crazed, frenetic carnival-like chaos of randomly, rapidly flashing colors displayed on a vehicle, is what best captures the attention of motorists while keeping first responders safe from drivers getting "mesmerized" and driving straight into the emergency vehicles. I posit something similar for the re-designed Old Georgetown Road. Engineers have mistakenly bought into the idea of saturating the landscape with every conceivable type of lane warning. Rather than creating a quickly "readable" set of navigation instructions, this has invited a chaos, a Babel of confusing markings and indicators that do more to confuse drivers than to facilitate more efficient navigation through the area.
Alternate headline:
"Some Bethesda Drivers Are Stupid"
The traffic safety geniuses overlooked an obvious latent design flaw.
Driving at night, the the moving plastic pole shadows create the illusion of
multiple virtual pedestrians, making it a perilous game of Where is Waldo.
Sounds like a driver problem. In what world would a driver think it's OK to drive on a striped, sequestered roadway like that? There could be massive "DO NOT DRIVE HERE" signs plastered every foot of the bike lanes and you'd still see drivers like this doing what they do.
This is similar to how, about once every other week now, a confused driver bypasses the massive cattle gates blocking Beach Drive between Knowles Ave and Cedar Lane on weekends and drives on the closed roadway teeming with pedestrians and cyclists. Just because just-barely car-sized gap exists between the edge of the gate and the sidewalk does not mean the clearly closed roadway is "inviting" to drivers.
Most drivers won't have any problems but there are a lot of seniors, (and peopleon their phones), driving around with less than ideal situational awareness. As a rider, I don't take anything for granted especially the right-of-way. That said, the lane closure in both directions on OGR is the dumbest use of lanes that are obviously needed in such a high density area.
How do I best use the word "mendacious?"
I ride the length many early mornings and see quite a few others. I return in the early and hot afternoon and see occasionally just one or two. There are a few regulars I see pretty regularly lately.
So thousands sit in rush hour traffic so a few "regulars" can use 1/3 of Old Georgetown Road?
2:14 - Be ready to be severely criticized for saying "dumbest use of lanes". I've said the same all along. Why, because that's exactly what this is. The dumbest use of these lanes in a high density area is something you'd think politicians would come out and say and in the same breath, suggest safer and existing alternatives like the old trolley trail. But no.
2:46 - So let's shut down the entire roadway for a few people. I work very often on OGR and can count on two hands how many bikers I have seen. But it doesn't matter, the Anti-Car movement must go full speed ahead!
8:39 - very nicely stated.
I see cyclists all the time especially now in the summer. I am confused by those saying they never see bikes - do you even drive on Old Gtown Rd? The lanes aren't teeming with bikes like in Copenhagen, but they are most definitely being used. I also don't feel that traffic is much worse. I think those that are railing against the bike lanes are just very easily annoyed individuals.
Hopefully Elrich and his ilk don't figure this out, too. But even as a lowly pedestrian, much less a cyclist, one CANNOT transit Wisconsin Ave 355 from Pooks Hill to 'Grosvenor.' This is almost unbelievable so close to a major city, much less the Nation's Capitol and our prestigious zip codes.
The only way truly solve that would be an expensive flyover like on Georgia over 495. Ours would be far longer and, I bet, far more expensive. Maybe we should do that rather than give up a lane on OGR?
Entire roadway!
The Bethesda Trolley Trail is worthless as a bike commuter route.
Ride a bike already you SUV driving blockheads.
Maybe it will entice more to ride. I think many are just a bit jealous and envious.
5:46 - It's summer, yes so traffic is obviously lighter. But very soon, it'll crank up again. And yes, of course we travel on Old Georgetown and usually many times per day. The traffic pre lane grab was never as far back as it is now. It's jammed from before the beltway to Cedar heading southbound in the morning. Only people who travel Old Georgetown would know this and I do. The bikes are very few per day. So, a dozen bikes per week are given their own, private bike path while thousands of cars suffer? I get it.
Yes, indeed!
Traffic is bad on OGR. There’s no reason to ever go through there ever now. Avoid it like the plague if you plan on getting where you want to go in peace
I use the lanes very frequently, and I often see many cyclists on the route. It's a shame there are so many whiney people posting her, not realizing that they too could benefit from a little fresh air and exercise. To my eye, the roadway is doing a good job handling both the volume of traffic and the bike lanes. In fact, I can't remember the last time I've seen a back-up on the road, except for close-in to downtown Bethesda (note that there are not bike lanes east of Sibley hospital).
For those who dismiss the Bethesda Trolley Trail as "useless", consider what Elrich & Co. have spent making OGR a disaster during rush hour. These politicians rarely consider the consequences and NEVER accept blame for their actions.
Come September when school starts and along with the push to make federal employees actually show up to work is going to make OGR intolerable during rush hour. Money could have been spent to improve the trail at a fraction of the cost to simply maintain the bike lanes on OGR.
The goal is actually to make it so miserable to drive thinking that this alone will force behavior according to what Rockville deems appropriate. The reality rarely works that way. Perhaps the upside is more CO2 leading to more greenery along OGR...
5:32 - Ah yes, having a strong opposition to an entire lane being taken out of commission for a few bikes equals whiny, unhealthy people. Typical Far Left loon comment very reminiscent of past comments by the likes of Dem politicians such as, "those smelly Walmart shoppers". Nice.
5:49 - 100% correct. And the money you mentioned is truly staggering. So far, hundreds of millions of our money has been spent on land reductions, bike lanes, white poles, etc, etc with more on the way. Meanwhile, crime goes almost ignored. The road isn't broken but the crime situation clearly is here and across the nation. Getting cars off the road seemingly is the focus but getting crooks off the streets isn't. Nice.
JAC's us-versus-them mentality is sad, emotionally driven, and reminds me of a toddler who believes someone took their toy from them unfairly. "While cars suffer?" Please. Stop being so dramatic - it is clear nothing else of import is going on in your life so you must focus your rigor on ... let me double check... bike lanes?
Folks like JAC are much more concerned about blaming a certain political party (which makes them feel better, since blaming someone makes it seem like you're doing something constructive when you're not actually doing anything at all), instead of viewing a matter objectively and discussing possible compromise. This is why you're being called whiny. If you need anything else spelled out for you, please let me know.
8:23 - oh okay Mr or Mrs traffic expert. Be sure to post a similar comment to the many others who have shared their strong opposition to lanes being taken away in favor of very few bikes per week going by.
In case 8:23 has been absent from reality, this is a problem solely generated by the current party in power. Logic doesn't dictate the closure of 2-lanes on a heavily traveled state road that borders a major federal agency with thousands of employees but in the psychedelic realm I guess this could be Trump's fault.
The closure of lanes on LFP & OGR was not a change dictated by need but a desire to control. Any objective observer can see that in addition to the absence of any possible compromise.
@10:46 Some of us don't have the luxury to live close enough but I get it, you need your entitlements and as a member of the middle class, we're used to paying for everything whether we find it fair or not.
9:51 - Simply stated, that's 100% correct.
7:02 I live off of OGR - I have plenty of experience with what the road is like during rush hour, and the bike lanes have not made a discernable difference in regards to traffic. What I have noticed, though, is that it's no longer absolutely terrifying to use the sidewalks on OGR. But if wanting a safe place for pedestrians and cyclists makes one a "far left loon," then so be it.
1:28 lives off of OGR but doesn't commute on it like many who actually need to use the road during rush hour and can attest to the traffic. I'm sure you needed safe spaces for more than just OGR.
1:28 - And I like many travel that stretch multiple times per day. Today for example, 6 from Cedar to Rockville. The traffic now is not bad because, well, it's August. But very soon it will be therejammed in the morning from Wildwood to beyond Cedar. Evening rush, as others have said, will be awful now that Uncle Joe is demanding government workers finally return to the office. It's a perfectly good road that has never been an issue even though there have been a few accidents and yes, tragic fatalities. This is anti car and total government control. It's being studied again by the state but no one is dumb enough to think, for a second, they'll remain forever. Your sidewalk comment makes no sense.
4:45 - Exactly.
Although I disagree with JAC on this issue, 8:23 does little to make a point with the typical ad hominem rebuttal we've come to expect.
Ask Jake about riding on rhe sidewalk vs. the road surface. Won't work asking him, he's still dead.
2:15 - Disagree, fine and always as it should be. The last thing we need these days are keyboard cowboys but that's how online communication goes sadly.
4:09 - Any death is tragic. Many in this area know that family, or are neighbors, etc. Awful no doubt about it. But accidents, even tragic ones, do happen. There are many reports (even citing the death of the Foreign Service Officer) on River Road that suggest separated bike lanes are actually more dangerous than they are safer. What's safer, and for sure it seems backwards, is riding on the side of the road in the travel lane itself with vest, helmet, lights, etc. Millions and millions of dollars are being spent and even with these poles and a lane being removed, there will be accidents with a bike.
Bragging that you drive on OGR "many times a day" while simultaneously complaining about traffic is peak JAC obliviousness. YOU are the cause of traffic, not the cyclists.
"This is anti car and total government control" I envy your life as it must be so fortunate as for you to believe that installation of two bike lanes on a commuter road constitutes "total government control."
I have no stake in these exchanges, but I do find it odd that 2:15am calls out 8:23 for ad hominem, but fails to also mention JAC's ad hominem attacks as well. Perhaps a second account for JAC has come to the rescue? A cursory at best commenter otherwise.
10:25 - vast majority of the time I comment on what has been said not the commenter. Recently I said that a comment was Far Left loon comment but that was rare and that one was mostly toward the post made. How do I know about the person commenting? That's silly and weakens a particular stance. Agree, disagree is fine even strongly.
Tough to understand that some people actually need to drive to get things done. I realize in a utopian world where everyone does what you think is best makes sense. In the land of the real its just a bit more complicated...
6:02 - Even from the driver's seat of a Yukon, it would be pretty obvious how dangerous the sidewalks on OGR were before the bike lanes were added. They were narrow, with no form of barrier from traffic. If calling that dangerous makes no sense, it's because you never paid it any thought.
I really wish you would, for a minute, think about this from any perspective other than that of a driver. OGR was a very dangerous road for pedestrians and cyclists beforehand, and I'm just not sure why anybody would want to go back to that.
I challenge all my neighbors in all those beautiful residential neighborhoods to get on any bike (e bikes, roo) maybe put on a rack and panniers, and start using the resources and fun in and around Bethesda. Lots to do, go to Pike and Rose, even! It xan be done and fun! I now go literally months without even starting my car! Knock wood. If you're adventurous enough yiu can make it from your door to Pittsburgh. Quite amazing really. Get out there!
Didn't realize cars were prohibited.
@2:02 Step back for moment and realize that this solution impacts thousands of people everyday and the world is made up of compromises. This one favors a handful while the majority will be sitting in traffic idling during rush hour. Taking your premise that sidewalks with multi-lane traffic running adjacent is too dangerous would imply that most non-limited access roads need to have lanes taken away or are you just concerned about the one near your house?
I'm not sure which is funnier - saying that giving bicycles consideration on our major roadways is "total government control", or JAC whining about "keyboard cowboys".
Number of bicyclists ~ 2
Number of NIH, Walter Reed, Suburban Hospital essential workers impacted - thousands
Does 12:57 ever consider the people that have to commute for employment or does the world of convenience revolve around just locals and the heck with every one else?
4:07 - Make sure you make similar comments towards the many others who are posting about the prioritization of a few bikes over the thousands of cars negatively impacted by removing an entire lane of traffic on a busy state road that is a thoroughfare so many need and use to get from one place to the other. Remember, it's a called OGRoad not OG Trail. So make sure you call out the others and make sure you include the time stamp as so many post under "anonymous".
If I am a keyboard cowboy then JAC is a full fledged keyboard warrior.
Leave home a little early if you feel so impacted.
@2:24: This IS a compromise. MDOT could have gone much farther, such as dedicated bike signaling, 30 MPH speed limits, and concrete barriers to separate the bike and car lanes.
Leaving it the way it was a year ago wouldn't have been a compromise, it would've been giving everything to drivers.
@2:24: I'm definitely not concerned with only roads near my home -- I think Columbia Pike is even worse.
So according to 1:21, we should be blessed with the taking away of 33% of a major thoroughfare which in the fall will have a significant increase in volume. I figured only a pathological storyteller could justify the lanes for the tens of riders daily, but there you are.
Hard to convince someone whose just been given a huge entitlement to see the logic of the many versus the few but that's how we got Elrich & Moore.
Just for the record, someone earlier said 'It's OG Road, not OG Trail.' That actually speaks to the naive short sighted mindset that fosters the car drivers misunderstandings. I've been ticketed, twice, on my bike as a motor vehicle. Both times by overzealous police. I bike commute, I'm not out for exercise per se, I'm out there to get somewhere, earn money, pay taxes, buy stuff. By definition, and per the law, being ticketed, I am driving a motor vehicle and as such I demand a safe lane. Be glad I'm not a VC, that'd Vehicular Cyclist. Those are the extreme riders hat are in the middle and third lanes, really slowing down traffic and making left turns. More of us can be like that, count your blessings it's only one lane!
5:40 - I definitely count my blessings that they haven't reduced the lanes further. But actually, that remains to be seen. And since you see your bicycle as a motor vehicle (I don't believe that that's accurate by the way) then you should ride on the edge of the lane closest to the sidewalk sharing the road with your fellow, four-wheel vehicles. Are you aware that there's a legitimate report, citing the River Road tragedy where a US Foreign Service officer was killed on her bike, that shows dedicated bike lanes are actually more dangerous than riding on the road? It seems counterintuitive but makes sense when you consider better sight lines, safer for bikes making turns, etc, etc. There's a preliminary report from SHA on this. Their data seems dubious but they aren't going away. And yes, it's called OGRoad not trail. Sorry.
Don't know the circumstances for why 5:40 was ticketed but I can tell you as a rider, (BTT, OGR & CCT), and a driver, there are plenty of riders who believe they are not subject to road laws like stoplights/stop signs etc. Everyone using the road should be subject to the same laws but come fall, you're going to see thousands idling twice a day in am/pm rush on OGR so less than a handful of people can ride OGR. Do you honestly think that is the best use of existing lanes & resources?
8:40 - Of course it's not a good use of public resources but that doesn't stop the Far Left cabal in Rockville. Their Zero Vision Utopia will cost 100's of millions of dollars. This is all couched as bike safety and share the road, etc. What it really is, is cars are bad and contribute to global warming and should be reduced. Ride a bike they say. Get some fresh air they say. Well, I power walk 30 miles per week so don't tell me to get exercise. Stay off my combustion engine and give us our lanes back. No, they'll never, ever be taken down.
@3:13 Look, man, if you think those bike lanes are so pointless, why don't you try taking one down 355 and see how that feels? There's clearly no other way of convincing you that cyclist and pedestrian safety is more important than cutting 2 minutes off of Linda's trip to Balducci's in her Escalade ESV.
It's HOGWASH, to put it mildly that riding near the curb with cars in YOUR lane is safer than a dedicated lane. It's apparent that whoever believes that doesn't ride a bike especially in this environment. One thing I can attest to is that our unique situation and huge numbers of Uber/lyft drivers rushing to get their fares with no distinguishing markings (to cite in reckless complaints) is another big safety problem. Compound that with the high percentage of these drivers from countries where anyone on a bike is a third class citizen, the drivers disdain shows in their unprofessional and dangerous disregard. They don't realize we ride for exercise and pleasure. Ask any cyclist what I'm referring to.
Of course it's safer to have a dedicated lane but is it reasonable? Whether you like it or not, the DC metro area is fairly high density with significant road traffic and removing a full 1/3 of a road that is already at capacity is just plain stupid.
A compromise might have been to take one lane away for 2-way bike traffic and narrow/reconfigure the median to preserve 6-lanes but that didn't fit the make-driving-as-miserable-as-possible agenda.
12:30 - Hogwash? Did you do your own thorough traffic study to reach that conclusion? Did you publish an 800 page report and accompanying book which is available on Amazon all about bike safety as engineer John Forester has? Here's a snippet from John Forester's book: John Forester emphasizes that cyclists should consider themselves drivers of vehicles in traffic. That means obeying the rules of the road, because when all drivers obey the same rules, they don't have collisions. Forester explains why cyclists should not be afraid to cycle in traffic, and he urges them to resist being shunted off into government-sponsored bike paths as if they were incompetent children. Cyclists fare best, he says, when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles.
Heritage Foundation article mentioning the River Road tragedy: https://www.heritage.org/transportation/commentary/bike-lanes-dont-make-cycling-safe
5:40 - Was ticketed by the police while biking. As this data supports, bikes should share the road with cars and will be safer than riding on separated lanes. Obeying all traffic laws as cars do will be better for all. Disagree if you like but you're being fooled. Your taxes are greatly appreciated by these policy wonks. 100's of millions spent while people rob and loot and nothing happens to them. Nice.
Any cyclist that even has heard of Forester laughs at his opinion and 'study.' Ask anyone efficiently negotiating traffic. It's Pie in the Sky.
7:56 - Yet another expert.
Thanks, I don't think I'm an 'expert' but I bike commuted everyday 11 miles for 15 years. Bike toured up and down the East coast. Did Ragbrai a few times, ride almost everyday often thru downtown DC, to DCA and Alexandria, a few times a week to Rockville. I'm 68, and I'm pretty aggressive on the road. A few of us have seen Forester's inane 'study,' its not rooted in reality. Get out there and learn for yourself rather than cite something yiu know absolutely nothing about.
6:54: The Heritage Foundation is not a reasonable source.
5:54 Sorry we can't use any of "approved" sources as they were too busy researching what ice cream flavor Brandon chose while on perpetual vacation.
5:54 - For the Far Left in MoCo, of course not. Is Forbes acceptable? It was posted there too.
"Posted" means nothing, you should know better.
5:39 - The Heritage Foundation; the organization that has been supporting and propping up far-right activist judges for decades, is about as far as you can get from a reasonable source. That would be like me presenting you with a Mother Jones article and insisting upon it's balanced take. You'd call me ridiculous, but it's the same thing.
Reuters, AP, heck even USA Today are actual news sources. I know you have exceedingly conservative viewpoints on most issues, but it's not hard to tell the difference between biased and unbiased sources.
1:25 - I said Forbes has this story as well. Bike lane safety is political? Huh? It's either safe or unsafe.
3:03 - The main issue here is whether or not the bike lanes have made an improvement in safety for cyclists and pedestrians vs. having no bike lanes at all. The design they went with is not perfect, I'm not arguing that it is. The problem lies in the fact that opponents of the bike lanes aren't fighting to improve the design or make an altogether better functioning throughfare. That's because they don't care about the impact on cyclist, pedestrian, and driver safety, because they oppose the bike lanes altogether.
Before the bike lanes were built, 2 cyclists were killed in as many years. Drivers in the DC area (and I drive a car too) have become more and more erratic, and cars as a whole have become larger and heavier. If they kept the road the way it had been, it was inevitable that more cyclists and pedestrians would have been struck by drivers who were either not paying attention, or driving recklessly. Even with bike lanes, that doesn't mean no deaths will ever happen again, but we haven't seen one yet.
MDOT is never going to go back to the 6-lane, 40 MPH, narrow-sidewalked highway that was there 2 years ago, because that design had major safety failings that resulted in the deaths of multiple people. Now what they COULD do is make modifications to the current design to improve traffic flow, and provide a better buffer between cars and bikes. They've already made changes since the bike lanes opened, namely retiming the traffic lights to prevent backups, and traffic flow did improve as a result. But to say that they should remove the bike lanes altogether, is honestly insane.
1:25 Forgot their favorite MSM sites where Democracy does Die in Darkness. Irregardless of what is presented, trust but verify always applies so dismissing a story out of hand due to source is shaking hands with ignorance and apathy. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, (although CNN has frozen time for a while).
Irregardless? Are you from Jersey?
@8:11 You make an assumption that Rockville even cared about what anyone wanted let alone the thousands that will sit iding in traffic twice a day. You seem to remember the open council hearings that took into account people that actually need to commute along OGR. Too bad that was a dream and never happened. I get it, you feel any solution that let's you ride to Aldi in your own private lane is a win and the rest of us be dammed. Logic doesn't take away 1/3 of a major roadway for a handful of riders but here we are.
12:17 - Prepare to be electronically whipped for daring to step outside the group think. And let's recall when the public hearing and full discussion of the OGR lanes took place. That's right, during Covid lockdown. Let's take a major state commuter road that isn't broken and see how we can totally screw it up for thousands of cars per day for a dozen bikes per week as you allude. Oh, the keyboard assassins are coming for you.
I'll be headed up that way, and back, Saturday morning pulling a trailer, come out and say hi!!
If only 9:26 were allowed to pay their "fair-share" based on usage...
Bikes cause lots of road damage!
I guess 10:03 doesn't understand how things work in basic civil engineering. The closed off lanes on OGR will be maintained in the same way the rest of the road. Because of increased traffic, (not to mention that EV's weigh on average 20% more than their ICE counterpart AND pay NO ROAD TAX), will require repaving at a higher frequency.
Why am I not surprised when an entitled person has no idea on what things actually cost, (and that's not just dollars), but explaining it is wasted effort.
Agreed 5:46pm
I think that that cities need to EDUCATE drivers when these new traffic patterns are installed and how the new lanes work, especially when it is a traffic pattern they have not seen before or was not common in the area before, or not covered in the drivers handbook when many of the drivers in the area got their license.
Post a Comment