How about radar-triggered tire spikes, like the ones that cause "severe tire damage" at parking lots? A bit draconian, perhaps, but extremely effective.

I'm waiting for the first time I see one of these zoom past me...will they be particularly targeted by the cops, so that they will keep to their commitments?

Just a couple of comments that I have to make after I say that I support this initiative - I am tired of people driving too fast through our neighborhoods, risking everyone's lives.

First though, while I think that it is good to crack down on drivers who recklessly speed and don't look before they turn, we also need to look at bicyclists that don't obey traffic laws. There have been many times as a pedestrian that I have almost been hit by a bicycle while crossing a street when I had the walk light. Rather than stopping at their red like the auto traffic did, the bicyclists decide often to just keep going. I have almost hit them with my car for the same reasons. So it is not all the drivers' faults (though some is, please don't think I am saying otherwise).

Second, how can anyone expect the citizens to obey the laws when our police force chooses not to? I cannot tell you how many times I have been passed by a police car going over the speed limit but they did not have lights or sirens on. I am quite sure there was never an emergency, it is just how they drive. Well, if they can speed, why can't we? (the police also have a problem using hands-free cell phones while driving - meaning they don't. I hate this! I hate it when civilian do it but I hate it even more when our cops do it - I guess it's a case of do as I say not as I do!)

Lastly, I want to know what kind of penalties there are for speeding? Even if someone gets caught (I can't remember the last time I heard anyone talking about getting pulled over for speeding in DC) I think the fines are fairly low. This is a serious and life-risking offense (as is red-light running). The fines should be commensurate.

I wish this program well. But I think we have a long way to go to clean up our streets.

This whole initiative seems rather off the mark. While 25 MPH may be appropriate for some residential streets, the overall speed limits within the District are so low as to encourage people to disregard them - and once people are breaking the law, it's easy to rationalize speeding excessively. Compare, for example, the Anacostia Freeway (different speed limits in different stretches, always below 55) with the Pasadena Freeway in LA. Once the District shows enough respect to set limits that are practical and aren't viewed as an excuse to simply generate speed camera revenues, then it will - hopefully - generate some respect in return. Only by taking an approach that shows some recognition for the realities of actual driving conditions will there be any hope of getting people to drive reasonably - and, hopefully, avoid the pedestrian, bike, and auto tragedies we too often read about. I don't see that here, at least based on this blog entry.

JP,DC, You're spot on.

I see a lot of noise from bicyclists demanding that drivers "Share the Road!" while I constantly see bicyclists ignore the traffic laws by running red lights and stop signs, weaving in traffic - sometimes in HOV lanes, and jumping onto the sidewalk to avoid slow traffic. Not to mention slowing down traffic by riding several abreast. And you don't DARE blow your horn at them!

These are the people who demand bike paths then refuse to use them and end up riding on the roads, as is the case in Rock Creek Park.

As for the DC speed limits, they are indeed too low, especially on the commuter thoroughfares and the few freeways that exist in the District. I would agree that drivers would respect a realistic speed limit far more than an artificially low speed limit that's obviously set low soley for the purpose of generating revenue from speed camera tickets.

I would also add another perspective: the speeding traffic, the congestion - and its attendant pollution, and the accidents on city streets are direct consequences of killing the majority of the District's planned freeways. By cancelling the freeways, DC forced the traffic that belongs on a freeway - and all that comes with it - onto city streets.

Not defending the speeders, but whenever I read or see a report about yet another child killed (like yesterday) on DC streets, I can't help but wonder what exactly did those who succeeded in killing the freeways "win"?

I'm trying to picture where in DC there are HOV lanes that a cyclist would use, or HOV lanes at all for that matter.

What's wrong with a cyclist jumping onto the sidewalk to avoid slow traffic, if it's in a part of town where sidewalk riding is legal?

"These are the people who demand bike paths then refuse to use them and end up riding on the roads, as is the case in Rock Creek Park."

CEEAF, did it ever occur to you that maybe cyclists are individuals and they don't all think the the same? That perhaps they vary in their comfort of riding on the road, some love it, some hate it? And maybe that the ones who are comfortable with riding on the road are not the ones agitating for facilities?

As a historical fact, the multi-use path (not a bike path) was not demanded by cyclists. It was created by the Park Service at the behest of motorists to try to get cyclists off the road. The problem is that that the Park Service created a lousy trail that is far inferior to the road, so any cyclist who is at all comfortable riding in traffic is going to choose the road. Oh, and DDOT has offered to pay for improving the trail, but the Park Service has refused their offer.

Oh boy. I can't wait to hear what kind of road rage incidents are spurred by this initiative. DC is a hurry, hurry region and people who go the speed limit unfortunately become victims of aggressive impatient drivers who WILL cut them off or pull dangerous maneuvers to get around them...

why not ban biking in DC? I live in Petworth, and it seems there is always some bicyclist crossing against the traffic light.

Banning bicycles in DC would certainly save lives.

I would agree that 25mph is very impractical for many roads in the District (K Street tunnel, Rock Creek Parkway and South Dakota Avenue come to mind); however, the incredibly improved gas mileage you get from going the speed limit might cool down everyone's rage. Also there is no benefit from going faster on DC roads because the light timing. In most cases, recently it has gotten worse, going the posted speed limit allows you to cruise with all green lights and not stopping. Just stay to the left and go the speed limit. You'll find it amusing when people fly past you and then you pass them because they had to stop at a light.

"improved gas mileage you get from going the speed limit "

Sivad,
My best gas mileage in my car is 30-35 mph, not 25 mph! And I can't set my cruise control at 25 mph; I've tried. Therefore, to drive at 25 mph, I need to keep one eye on the speedometer, making it harder to keep my eyes and concentration on the road.

Not that I advocate speeding, but it makes 30-35 mph safer because then I have the ability to look out for those interjections into my travel lane.

"...perhaps they vary in their comfort of riding on the road, some love it, some hate it?"

I hate driving on the road in my car, so does that mean I can drive on the sidewalks and paths and lawns of the area???

I will begin to sympathize with bicyclists when they share the rules of the road. Red means STOP, that's when the bike is no longer moving. STOP signs mean stop, again when the bike is no longer moving. Green means GO, you can move your bike. And a general rule of thumb, if a car lawfully can't drive on it, you shouldn't either.

"CEEAF, did it ever occur to you that maybe cyclists are individuals and they don't all think the the same? That perhaps they vary in their comfort of riding on the road, some love it, some hate it? And maybe that the ones who are comfortable with riding on the road are not the ones agitating for facilities?...

As a historical fact, the multi-use path (not a bike path) was not demanded by cyclists. It was created by the Park Service at the behest of motorists to try to get cyclists off the road."

Thanks for the education re: the origin of the Rock Creek Park Trails.

However, another historical fact is that bicycle activist groups demanded sole access to most of the park on weekends. Thanks to the cyclists, there are many sections of the park where I can't take my elderly mother for a Sunday drive.

And I understand that some cyclists may be "more comfortable" riding in the road. I have no problem with that. My problem - and it's a big one - is with the cyclists who ride in the middle of traffic, knowing they are slowing everyone down, and refuse to move.

Some of them actually ride several abreast, blocking the entire road, and they get very nasty if a motorist has the audacity to blow their horn and indicate a desire to pass them. I've been cursed at, threatened, and had objects thrown at my vehicle - especially when I happen to be driving an SUV.

Not to mention the cyclists who ride in the HOV lanes in Alexandria and the ones who run red lights, ride through stop signs, and jump onto the sidewalks when they feel above waiting in traffic like those they demand "share the road". I've had many close calls with cyclists while walking on the sidewalks or crossing the street downtown.

Sure, bicylists have the right to use the road. But I don't see any law that gives them the right to selectively obey the law. And I don't see anything that says they have a right to impede traffic.

Considering the way many cyclists in Rock Creek Park ride and the attitude they display towards others - including drivers, pedestrians, and any other cyclists not as gonzo as they are, perhaps the cyclists should be just kept off the roads in the park.

I say BRAVO to this program. I have too many idiots using my residential street as a bypass to the more commercial street, because they don't like the stop lights. Well, my street has 4-way STOP signs, and barely anyone ever stops. I like to yell at them "it's a STOP sign, not a SLOW-DOWN sign." When I leave my house in the car, I make sure i come to a full and complete stop at each and every stop sign. Pisses them off royally, but screw 'em. I live here, not them.

The District's speed limit policy contributes to the unsafe conditions on neighborhood streets. With speed limits set uniformly low even on the largest thoroughfares, drivers might as well try jumping off and cutting through neighborhoods. If the City allowed traffic to move a little faster on the major roads, the perceived benefit from cutting through smaller side streets would be reduced.

"Second, how can anyone expect the citizens to obey the laws when our police force chooses not to?"

Amen to that, and it isn't just DC police. This problem is rife throughout the metro area. My biggest pet peeve since I moved to this area nearly 20 years ago is the absolutely pathetic examples set forth by police officers while they are driving--particularly when they are driving their marked cruisers while off duty.

RE: Police Etc.

As far as DC police are concerned, they have far more pressing things to do than to enforce traffic laws. I would rather them hunt down an assaulter or a murderer than write speeding tickets and have them waiting to show up in court for the hearing. If they break traffic laws who cares? They already have to waste time fighting automated cameras, which means more time they are not attending to more important things.

"And I can't set my cruise control at 25 mph"

Are you kidding me? Why would you even USE cruise control in a neighborhood? I'd rather you be going 30 and be actively engaged in the road conditions than 25 via cruise control with brain on auto pilot! Sheesh...cruise control is for non-congested highway speeds only. Any other use is not safe...and frankly I can't remember the last time I've used cruise since moving to this region.

CEEAF- I don't see many bicyclists in Alexandria where you're talking about but I do see lemmings...er, tourists...that seem unable to comprehend that the traffic lights do change to red and that they should NOT BE STEPPING OFF THE CURB at the time against traffic to cross the street. I'm talking about the crossings along King Street that don't have ped signals (Peyton, West, etc...) One of these days, I tell ya...it's bad enough the natives jaywalk, but at least they know to be aware and move their behinds when I have the green. Tourists are just CLUELESS and follow the herd in front of them with nary a glance at their surroundings. (Steam hissing...)

CyanSquirrel, I see LOTS of cyclists in the HOV lanes on Route 1 in Old Town.

As for the rant about the tourists, whatever the tourists do is NO EXCUSE for cyclists to break the law.

Cyclists are very assertive and very vocal about telling drivers about the "right" of cyclists to use the road (newsflash: no one has the "right" to use a road; it's a priviledge) and the obligation of drivers to "share the road".

The cyclists are deafeningly silent - by their actions as well as by their words - about the responsibilities of a cyclist to ALSO obey the law and "share the road".
Now you want to make excuses for bullying pedestrians.

That mindset is irresponsible, immature, and inexcusable.

BTW, I also ride. On the roads as well as on the trails. I just treat pedestrians as I would want someone to treat me and I have enough sense to know that I'm no match for a motor vehicle.

Something about maturity and common sense.

CEEAF --

Of course cyclists are going to get mad at you when you honk at them. In the District of Columbia, it is against the law to use your horn at any time except in an emergency. There's nothing that ticks off other road users like being selective about which laws you choose to obey.

" Of course cyclists are going to get mad at you when you honk at them. In the District of Columbia, it is against the law to use your horn at any time except in an emergency."

I would call a situation where one vehicle is going too slowly to keep up the traffic and causing a potential hazard to be an emergancy.

If the cyclist get "mad" at my horn blowing, so be it. If they damage my vehicle, they'll pay a price.

" There's nothing that ticks off other road users like being selective about which laws you choose to obey "

Damn straight. That's why so many drivers hate cyclists. They are the epitome of "selectively law-abiding" road users.

CEEAF--
I'm not going to defend cyclists who run red lights or go the wrong way or ride at night without lights.

If you are going to get so worked up about others' perceived violations of the law, you should spend a little time to educate yourself. You have repeatedly cited two acts as illegal that are not. The first is riding a bike in an HOV lane. Any vehicle can use an HOV lane if every available seat is filled. If a road is open to cyclists, they can use a HOV lane -- unless they're on a tandem with an empty seat!

The other is jumping onto the sidewalk. No law against this. In fact, here is what DC law has to say on the matter:
"1201.3 (b) A person operating a bicycle may overtake and pass other vehicles on the left or right side, staying in the same lane as the overtaken vehicle, or changing to a different lane, or riding off the roadway, as necessary to pass with safety.
1201.13 No bicyclist shall suddenly leave a sidewalk and ride into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield."

I actually find 1201.13 to be backwards, vehicles on the road shouldn't have to yield to ones entering. But the law is the law, right?

I would say that the epitome of a "selectively law-abiding" road user is someone who makes up their own definition of laws they don't think they have to obey.

CEEAF wrote:
"no one has the 'right' to use a road; it's a priviledge"

Actually, you do have the right to use a road. It's only operating a motor vehicle that's a privilege. In order to operate a motor vehicle you need a license from the state, which can be suspended or revoked administratively for any number of reasons. No license is required to walk or cycle. They can't take away your right to walk, or cycle, without throwing you in jail.

Banning bicycles, as you suggest, would be unconstitutional, in violation of the right of travel.

For a discussion of the legal issues, read this article:
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/5003.0.html

CEEAF-
My rant about pedestrians was in no way connected to bicyclists. I said I don't see many on my end of town (end of thought about cyclists...and on to MY PEEVE, which is lemming tourists who DELIBERATELY step off the curb against the light even when they see me not 25 feet from the intersection! I'm supposed to make up for their stupidity by slamming on brakes and skidding through the intersection? I did just that today as two grown men stepped off the curb into the path of my vehicle, trying to squeeze across the street after another car had just passed them and as mine rightfully entered the intersection to make a left. They had the audacity to give ME a dirty look when I honked my horn warning them to get the freak out of the road. I deal with this daily and there is no excuse! As a pedestrian myself I obey walk signals and lights, so why can't I get the same courtesy when I'm behind the wheel on the very same streets? I have as much sympathy for peds in Old Town as you have for bikers.)

Dude, careful about putting words in peoples' mouths. I despise anyone who flagrantly shows disrespect for the law, whether on two feet, two wheels, or four wheels. So you say cyclists are rude morons there on Patrick and Henry Streets? I believe you. I just pointed out I don't see them as often as you do.

True my car is 2000K of steel but when peds show they lack brains by stepping deliberately in front of my car, I wonder if the gene pool wouldn't be better off!!!

Make that 2K not 2000K. Brain fart. Actually less than that as I drive a honda S2000, which is one of the lightest cars on the road. And its the only thing saving those pedestrians' arses. I wouldn't want to mess up the paint job with their genetically inferior grey matter.
What's funny about today's (and yesterday's and the week before hat's) incident with lemmings: not one car was behind me or coming the other way. I was the last one through on a solid green light each time. Had the pedestrians waited merely another 5 seconds for me to rightfully clear the intersection before JAYWALKING, we wouldn't be reading this rant.

These comments about speed limits being too low have it backwards. The roads in DC (and even more so in the suburbs) are engineered for a higher speed than it is safe to drive without creating an environment that is unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians. The solution is not to raise the speed limit, but to redesign the roads to be consistent with the speed limits.

biker,

Too bad bike riders aren't licensed, considering their flagrant disregard of the laws and disrespect of other users - pedestrians as well as drivers.

As for your "right" to use the road, it ends at my bumper. I would never hit anyone intentionally, but if a collision should occur, the bike will lose.

That's all I have to say.

"The other is jumping onto the sidewalk. No law against this.No law against this. In fact, here is what DC law has to say on the matter:
"1201.3 (b) A person operating a bicycle may overtake and pass other vehicles on the left or right side, staying in the same lane as the overtaken vehicle, or changing to a different lane, or riding off the roadway, as necessary to pass with safety.
1201.13 No bicyclist shall suddenly leave a sidewalk and ride into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield."

Good to know.

I suggest everyone who uses the sidewalks and feels intimidated by bikers who DON'T BELONG THERE, no matter what the law says, carry something to throw into the bike's spokes in the event of a near-collison.

That does it. Thanks.

If I seem hostile to gonzo bikers, too bad.

You're dealing with someone who has suffered broken bones, thanks to a byclist who had the "right" to use the sidewalk, and who has been spit on, cursed at, and had their new car trashed by bikers exercising their "right" to use the road.

I've had enough.

Re 25 MPH speed limit - the speed limits are set with multiple factors taken into account, including noise and vibration. Residential areas with one lane for travel in each direction (usually one on each side is for parking) cannot have a higher speed without making the area unlivable. Many larger streets (e.g., Wisconsin north of Georgetown) have 30 MPH speed limits, and some are at 35 MPH. Commuters should respect DC residents' right to a quiet residential area.

CEEAF wrote:

"My problem - and it's a big one - is with the cyclists who ride in the middle of traffic, knowing they are slowing everyone down, and refuse to move....Sure, bicylists have the right to use the road....And I don't see anything that says they have a right to impede traffic."

There's a big difference between a bicyclist or other vehicle driver who *necessarily* (and usually quite briefly) slows following traffic (to their slower travel speed, not to a stop) and one who might *needlessly* impede lawful following traffic.

No driver (including a bicyclist) is ever required to sacrifice his or her safety for the convenience of following traffic, and there are many instances where bicyclists must command their travel lane to ensure their safety. This includes 12-ft and narrower travel lanes which are not wide enough to safely share laterally with autos, locations (such as intersections and driveways) where right turns are permitted, and when bicyclists are traveling at about the same speed as other traffic (downhill and in urban centers).

Honking at such lawful cyclists is nothing short of unprovoked harassment, so you should not be surprised when your "instructive" behavior is openly resented.

CEEAF also wrote:

"However, another historical fact is that bicycle activist groups demanded sole access to most of the park on weekends. Thanks to the cyclists, there are many sections of the park where I can't take my elderly mother for a Sunday drive."

You're apparently referring to three disconnected portions of one road (upper Beach Dr) in one park (Rock Creek) where motor vehicles have long been banned on weekends. This OPENS the park to diverse park users, so the access is not just for bicyclists. Moreover, parallel park roads (e.g., Ridge Rd, Ross Dr, Oregon Ave, etc.) are kept open to autos at all times, so your driving through this park has NEVER been prevented.

Road rage is the unhealthy consequence of spending too much time behind a steering wheel.

The primary purpose of 25 MPH speed limits is to make streets safer for pedestrians. The frequent violation of these limits by motorists creates far more public endangerment than the collective misbehavior of bicyclists.

"I suggest everyone who uses the sidewalks and feels intimidated by bikers who DON'T BELONG THERE, no matter what the law says, carry something to throw into the bike's spokes in the event of a near-collison. "

Ladies and gentlement, we have a new epitome of selective law abiding.

The poster named "Bike Commuter" said this:

"You have repeatedly cited two acts as illegal that are not. The first is riding a bike in an HOV lane. Any vehicle can use an HOV lane if every available seat is filled. If a road is open to cyclists, they can use a HOV lane -- unless they're on a tandem with an empty seat!"

Where did you get this idea? That's not the rule at all. To enter an HOV lane, the law is that the vehicle must have the required number of people, period. One of my cars is a Mazda RX-7, which is a two-seater. I CANNOT legally drive it on I-395 during HOV hours because the law is HOV-3, and I cannot legally have three people in the car. VDOT's web site regarding HOV lanes will confirm this (http://www.virginiadot.org). It has nothing to do with the number of seats in the vehicle. The "HOV-x" number is the number, period. (I'm not complaining about not being able to go in there, mind you; I'm just pointing out that you have a flawed understanding of the HOV law.)

With that said, I have no idea how the law on bicycles in Alexandria's HOV lanes works, and I don't know if the HOV-number applies to a bike. The odd thing about those HOV lanes is that they are on the RIGHT, rather than on the left as on I-66 outside the Beltway or the Dulles Toll Road. Normally a bicyclist is expected to keep as far to the right as practical (again, moving over to deal with parked cars, sewer grates, etc.), but how that works with an HOV lane on the right is a mystery to me because surely we don't want the cyclist riding in the middle lane. Perhaps we should treat those roads in Alexandria (especially US-1, which is twinned one-way streets) as though they were British roads where the left lane is the slow lane (and thus the right place for the cyclist).

Also, a minor point regarding sidewalks. I believe that in DC the law is that cyclists may not ride on the sidewalk within the downtown business district (and I have no idea how that is defined), but that elsewhere it's OK. I do not know what the law is in Virginia, but it was always emphasized to me growing up (usually by police who came to do safety presentations at school, although I think the Boy Scouts emphasized this too) that one must ride in the street in the direction of traffic. I HATE it when a cyclist is on the wrong side of the road; it's disorienting if you come around the corner and some guy on a bike is coming straight at you where he shouldn't be. Perhaps for little kids up to about age 7 or 8 the wrong side of the road (on neighborhood streets only) is fine since they're not coordinated enough to look over the shoulder, but not for anyone older.

Finally, regarding the idea of "pace cars." I live in Virginia and the speed limit in and out of my neighborhood is 25. I generally do my best to do 30. I find that 25 is a hard speed for both of my cars, as in second gear I rev a bit higher than I'd prefer (and waste gas), but in third gear it's a little too slow and the engine revs too low. So I do 30 and keep it in third. I inevitably get tailgated, every day, morning or evening, doesn't matter. I just snicker and ignore them. One idiot got mad and passed over the double-yellow one time and then complained to the cops that I was "driving recklessly" (I got one of those meaningless warning letters, which is how I know she complained online....I threw it in the paper shredder).

"I CANNOT legally drive it on I-395 during HOV hours because the law is HOV-3, and I cannot legally have three people in the car." Rich, you probably know this already, but I'm pointing it out lest your post cause any confusion: you CAN drive your two seater on 395 during HOV hours...just not in the HOV lanes. 395 is not like 66, where the entire road is HOV.

Right, that's what I meant, I can't go in the express lanes in that car during HOV hours (and if I want to do so, I take my other car). Thanks for pointing out that I was being ambiguous.

I DID legally drive solo on I-66 during HOV hours last Wednesday. I had a flight out of Dulles, and airport traffic is exempt. Makes it a lot quicker to get out there! But man, it confirms how antagonistic people in the DC area are, since people assume you're an HOV cheat and shoot dirty looks, flip you off, etc.

Sorry that anon post was me. Rich, you're right on about antagonism. I got the wrath of a dude this morning (and by using wrath, I am not exaggerating) for being courteous enough to let a space open so a person using their turn signal could get over. When they didn't get over fast enough(this guy was behind them), he took his anger out on me for opening the space in the first place. I'm certain I'll have a nightmare or two tonight over the look of hate and anger on this guys face. What a way to start the morning.