图像在Flickr上勇敢的心。

直流的自行车领导人不是我是DDOT一样乐观第五个选项15日街。WABA Eric Gilliland奇迹的逆流式道:如果有足够的空间

我认为你需要一个更广泛的缓冲区中位数停车场和自行车道南行。可以通过减少西边停车车道7英尺。5英尺7英尺停车车道旁边的自行车道道路上仍可能是更高的速度似乎并不足够。同样,我想看到停车是如何对待的十字路口西侧道路。鉴于逆流的自行车道,更大的景象距离是必要的。

美国自行车联盟的杰夫•皮也持怀疑态度,并回答一些问题:

  • DDOT提出如何保持分离逆流巷鉴于清洁工不能超越quick-curbs ?
  • 如果任何正在采取措施确保教会在15日和T(?)不继续双公园在星期天,这将阻止北行的自行车道?
  • 十字路口是如何设计尽量减少交通冲突与模糊逆流的自行车吗?
  • 将如何逆流巷路口吗?自行车交通如何把南东正确和安全地使他们转吗?
  • 什么工程将努力确保自行车可以安全地进入逆流车道从U街?
  • 这个实验装置的成功或失败将如何被评估,这样城市最终没有与其他半心半意的设计,比如共享总线/自行车道或托马斯圆自行车道?
我不知道所有关于周期轨道和逆流式自行车道的科学。我们要把钱花在安全改进,真正改善安全。同时,我想看到一些周期轨道,在地方和方式工作。这是地方,或其他地方?产能过剩,15日似乎是一个不错的地方试一试。当然,我们应该尽力把它做好。杜邦ANC专员维克多Wexler质疑为什么DDOT抛弃了双向操作。“我不认为我们应该让(双向)死在此基础上模糊的印象(强烈反对)。我认为双向选择很受欢迎。,这是多么清晰的共识(或缺乏)决定? I do not seem to recall one.” Many of New York’s recent innovations only happened because NYC DOT ignored the critics. They went ahead and plunked a plaza down in the Meatpacking District with much less analysis, planning, or input than we’ve had for 15th Street. They shared ideas and listened to residents, but didn’t go through a year-long planning process. They just stuck some temporary barriers in, looked at how it affected traffic, and then built a permanent plaza. DDOT’s planners obviously feel like they are getting attacked when they try to make a street better. At the same time, residents and advocates feel that plans change unexpectedly and unpredictably. Is 55% (the level of support for two-way) enough, or not enough? What is enough? I can certainly see how Chris Ziemann felt there wasn’t consensus, but setting policy by polling doesn’t lead to the best plans. Neighbors often can’t reach consensus on issues, especially difficult ones like road engineering where most participants aren’t experts. DDOT seems to primarily make decisions in one of two modes: either they don’t reveal plans until it’s too late for input, or they try to build consensus and end up backing off ideas, both good and bad, in the face of opposition, as17街。我们需要一个更好的过程。分区委员会并不决定一个分区差异的秘密,也不做一个调查。有一个定义的过程。首先,他们发布的提议。第二,有一个听证会。第三,经过仔细考虑,他们做出决定。相同BZA和办公室的计划。安理会甚至这,大部分的时间。DDOT需要这样一个过程。 The goal isn’t to listen more, or listen less, but listen consistently. Announce that a decision will be made. Post the details online and tell the ANC. Then hold a meeting. Finally, decide. The irony, of course, is that on 15th Street, Chris Ziemann is actually doing something pretty close. He announced some options, solicited feedback, and held a hearing. Now he’s soliciting another round of feedback. Next, I want DDOT to issue a recommendation that they feel is the best solution. It may not be what the most people want, or what generates the fewest complaints. It should be what’s actually right for the area. I don’t know if a cycle track is safer or not. Reasonable people disagree. DDOT planners should review the available research, listen to our intelligent bicycle leaders who make good points, and make a decision. I believe two-way operation is better. Reasonable people also disagree on that. Again, I’d like DDOT to review the research and make a decision. Neighbor feedback is important to ensure that they thoroughly understand the facts on the ground. But this isn’t a referendum. Whether, in the end, they agree with me or not, I want them to do not what’s most popular, but what’s right.