Unhappily, the Vermont Agency of Transportation’s survey seeking community feedback about this year’s reconstruction of about 4 miles of Route 5 in Hartford from Bugbee Street to the town line with Hartland closed on Dec. 12. Having blown that deadline, we will confine our remarks to this space.

In short, it stinks. Sorry, but really, it does.

At a cost of nearly $3 million, the project reduced motor vehicle traffic lanes from two to one in both directions, in order to add dedicated bicycle lanes and a 6-to-8-foot wide buffer between them and cars.

The resulting crazy quilt of lane changes, crosswalks, bicycle signal lights, a protected intersection, and colorful but opaque road markings that would do an abstract artist proud is sufficiently mind boggling that the AOT felt compelled to publish a schematic diagram intended to clarify how to navigate the new configuration.

It does not. As a source of confusion, it ranks second only to the physical project itself. Take for example, the following instruction: “Cyclists proceeding straight to southbound Route 4/5 wait at the stop bar and activate the nearby push button, proceeding across the intersection once the bicycle signal indication turns green.” A “stop bar” is probably a happy idea at this time of overabundant holiday good cheer, but what is has to do with bicycle or car navigation is not apparent to us.

Let us stipulate right here that the scribbler responsible for this commentary is not now, nor ever has been, a member of the bicycle riding community. With that said, we have several friends and close associates who have come to grief in bicycle accidents and by all means wish to enhance safety.

But we doubt that this project does that, although we can’t say for sure because we almost never see a bicyclist on that stretch of road anyway. But since the project was completed, we have seen already two near motor vehicle crashes resulting from driver confusion over where they should be when they endeavor to make turns.

No doubt, the project engineers borrowed features that have proved their worth in enlightened Western European countries with long histories of immersion in bicycle culture. In fact, the AOT informs us that this new Route 5 configuration includes a protected intersection “that physically separates cyclists from motorist traffic. Originating in the Netherlands decades ago, protected intersections have seen increased implementation in North America in recent years.”

Maybe so, but an earlier AOT publication indicates that the one in Hartford is the first to be installed in Vermont. Oh, Pioneers!

But we know Hartford, and for all its virtues, Hartford is no Amsterdam.

The AOT’s perplexing message goes on to note that if cyclists prefer not to use dedicated paths through the protected intersection at Route 5 and North Main Street, they still have the “option to navigate the intersection conventionally (i.e. merge with vehicular traffic) if comfortable doing so.” So drivers have to keep their head on a swivel to make sure they are not endangering dissenting cyclists who abjure the protected intersection.

Equally puzzling is the decision to make the buffers 6 to 8 feet wide instead of the minimum of 4 feet mandated by a new state law. Perhaps it is to accommodate spectators for the soon-to-be announced Tour de Hartford bike race.

As for the bike lanes, who are the intended users? Potential commuters to work? School children? Recreational cyclists? All of the above? Given the cold-weather climate, none of these users would be able to safely avail themselves of the bike lanes for at least three months of the year and maybe longer. Nor have we been aware of any pent-up demand for bicycle lanes on Route 5. Maybe the theory is that if you build them, the cyclists will come.

The Washington Post published a commentary last month in which the author asserted that bike lanes are “often installed not to satisfy the barely measurable trickle of residents who pedal to work,” but mainly to slow car traffic and discourage people from driving. Perhaps that’s the backstory of the Hartford project, too, which otherwise makes little sense in terms of your taxpayer dollars at work.