Thanks to the bike party organizers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

If the budget is tight, we should turn more car infrastructure into bike infrastructure. Bike infrastructure is a lot cheaper to maintain.

This is the most bike bros thing that has ever been said.

Its somewhat tongue in cheek response to the "we don't have money for bike infrastructure" complaints, but the reality is that roads are incredibly expensive to maintain. Its why so many roads around here are in such disrepair. There just isn't enough money to go around to keep up. Vehicles are getting heavier doing more damage to roads, while construction costs are outstripping inflation. Drivers refuse to pay more and general revenue is tight. Its a recipe for, self-inflicted, disaster.

No form of transportation has a higher cost per user than bicycling. It is astronomical. The city has spend billions for the benefit for an absurdly small group of people.

You are not factoring in the subsidies at the federal and local level for cars, fuel and the externalities around pollution, health, safety and military expenditure in the middle east. When you factor those costs in, cycling is easily the more cost-effective.

You sound like a high school student, and not a very bright one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

If the budget is tight, we should turn more car infrastructure into bike infrastructure. Bike infrastructure is a lot cheaper to maintain.

This is the most bike bros thing that has ever been said.

Its somewhat tongue in cheek response to the "we don't have money for bike infrastructure" complaints, but the reality is that roads are incredibly expensive to maintain. Its why so many roads around here are in such disrepair. There just isn't enough money to go around to keep up. Vehicles are getting heavier doing more damage to roads, while construction costs are outstripping inflation. Drivers refuse to pay more and general revenue is tight. Its a recipe for, self-inflicted, disaster.

No form of transportation has a higher cost per user than bicycling. It is astronomical. The city has spend billions for the benefit for an absurdly small group of people.

You are not factoring in the subsidies at the federal and local level for cars, fuel and the externalities around pollution, health, safety and military expenditure in the middle east. When you factor those costs in, cycling is easily the more cost-effective.

You sound like a high school student, and not a very bright one.

What is false? Be specific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

If the budget is tight, we should turn more car infrastructure into bike infrastructure. Bike infrastructure is a lot cheaper to maintain.

This is the most bike bros thing that has ever been said.

Its somewhat tongue in cheek response to the "we don't have money for bike infrastructure" complaints, but the reality is that roads are incredibly expensive to maintain. Its why so many roads around here are in such disrepair. There just isn't enough money to go around to keep up. Vehicles are getting heavier doing more damage to roads, while construction costs are outstripping inflation. Drivers refuse to pay more and general revenue is tight. Its a recipe for, self-inflicted, disaster.

No form of transportation has a higher cost per user than bicycling. It is astronomical. The city has spend billions for the benefit for an absurdly small group of people.

I remember someone calling you out on the "billions" figure, which was followed by a truly absurd attempt to show your math. Please refrain from sharing these made-up numbers outside of your cocktail parties with the Western Ave. set

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

If the budget is tight, we should turn more car infrastructure into bike infrastructure. Bike infrastructure is a lot cheaper to maintain.

This is the most bike bros thing that has ever been said.

Its somewhat tongue in cheek response to the "we don't have money for bike infrastructure" complaints, but the reality is that roads are incredibly expensive to maintain. Its why so many roads around here are in such disrepair. There just isn't enough money to go around to keep up. Vehicles are getting heavier doing more damage to roads, while construction costs are outstripping inflation. Drivers refuse to pay more and general revenue is tight. Its a recipe for, self-inflicted, disaster.

No form of transportation has a higher cost per user than bicycling. It is astronomical. The city has spend billions for the benefit for an absurdly small group of people.

You are not factoring in the subsidies at the federal and local level for cars, fuel and the externalities around pollution, health, safety and military expenditure in the middle east. When you factor those costs in, cycling is easily the more cost-effective.

You sound like a high school student, and not a very bright one.

It sounds like someone is challenged by the notion that they might want to consider anything beyond the few miles it takes them along Western and Connecticut avenues they drive each day to pick their latte and dry cleaning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see this type of driver behavior all.the.time.

But sure, its the bikes that are dangerous

The cyclist is traveling in the left lane at a rate of speed 1/3 below the speed limit and normal flow of traffic. The car made a pass that provided a safe distance between the cyclist and the vehicle. The cyclist complains that the pass was made over double yellow, okay, but the cyclist continues to travel in the left lane as a slower moving vehicle, demonstrating that they were determined not to let anyone pass them. It’s also funny to see cyclist claim they stopped at red light, when it looks like they are illegally in the crosswalk and the spedometer says 4 MPH, indicating that they are still moving and not actually stopped.

I don't know the cyclist, perhaps they were getting ready to turn left.

Either way, the cyclist has the right to ride in the lane and it is illegal for the driver to cross the double yellow line.

So you are wrong on both counts.

There is no blanket prohibition for crossing a double yellow line in DC. However, the cyclist has recorded themselves committing at least one clear traffic violation.

I've been looking this up and cannot find a reference in the DC regulations to the double yellow line. This is of course covered in the DC Driver Manual and we all know it is illegal, but what specific regulation does it violate?

There is not a specific bright line rule because the law intentionally allows for situations like what the cyclist depicted. Needing to cross for safety reasons while also complying with other laws.

Blowing past a cyclist is not "safety reasons" - that is just being selfish and operating the SUV in question very dangerously.

Cyclists are the least law abiding people on the road. They don't even follow the rules of "Idaho stops," a rule they wanted. They're only allowed to blow stop signs if no one else has the right of way at an intersection.

This really is focusing on the speck in another's eye while ignoring planks in your own territory. Drivers really are completely blind to their own illegal behavior. Speeding is the most obvious, and dangerous one, but the vast majority of drivers at any given point in time are violating one or more laws. Illegal driver behavior is so ingrained it doesn't even feel illegal to most drivers.

Not to mention that drivers enjoy the privilege of being ensconced in a multi-ton steel cage that not only insulates them from the consequences of their own reckless behavior but socializes the adverse effects thereof across all manner of surrounding road users. False equivalences between driver and cyclist behavior are one of the dumbest tropes to be found on the whole internet.

uh, what? this is bizarre. the laws are the laws, and everyone is supposed to follow them. the rules about when idaho stops are allowed are very specific. it's not just "you can do whatever you feel like."

Speed limits, stop signs, and red lights are also very specific, but routinely ignored by motorists on DC roads as a matter of course. When a staggering proportion of road users flout the law, focusing on those whose behavior poses the absolute least risk to others is, um, bizarre.

First of all, “a staggering portion” of motorists DO NOT ignore traffic laws “as a matter of course”. Most people stop - and wait - at red lights. Most people stop at stop signs. Most people, thanks to speed cameras everywhere, drive within 10 mph of the posted limit.

Your post implies that vehicular traffic is a chaotic free for all with no one following any laws whatsoever. Reality says 180 degrees the opposite of your lunacy. One simply has to observe traffic moving and see the truth. Cars stop for red signals. They move on green. Maybe a few people run the red trying to beat the very end of the yellow light, but in general, when the light is red, and people pull up to it, they stop, and wait for green.

You’re insane. You make it sound as though all drivers are going through red lights from a block away, blowing through stop signs at-speed without even lifting their foot, etc. in other words - you accuse drivers of doing the things +90% of cyclists do.

You’re a gaslighting fool.

It's a sign of the times that anyone who writes such a screed could accuse anyone else of "gaslighting" or being a "fool", let alone both things at once. Anyone who drives, bikes, and/or walks around DC knows the traffic violations that became endemic here over the pandemic. These are:

1. Speeding. Drive almost anywhere in the city at the speed limit and someone will be tailgating you in no short space of time before launching into an unsafe maneuver so that their speeding can resume without impediment. Anyone seeking further evidence can observe how the ritual braking behavior of drivers approaching speed cameras.

2. Not Stopping at Stop Signs. Concerned residents who have done surveys at intersections indicate that the overwhelming majority of vehicles roll through stop signs. About the only intersections where you will see vehicles coming to the legally-required full stop are those with stop sign cameras.

3. Yellow Light Running. This has gotten much more prevalent as of late. The DC Code is clear that vehicles must stop for a yellow light unless the vehicle cannot stop safely, yet the modal behavior among DC drivers is to roll through yellow lights regardless. Less common but still alarmingly prevalent are drivers to respond to yellow lights by speeding up and those who miss the yellow light and run the red light.

Other behaviors exhibited by a sizeable minority of drivers include double parking (endemic among delivery vehicles), parking or stopping in bike lanes or other places where motor vehicles are expressly prohibited, and the use of temporary or fake plates or the use of no plates at all.

The observations of PP suggest that they either haven't been to DC anytime recently or at least don't get out of their house much or have a specific interest in presenting a wildly distorted description of prevailing driver behavior on the avenues, boulevards, roads, streets, and lanes of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

[Anonymous]

There's a lot of bad vehicle driver behavior, but the myopic entitlement of some cyclists is concerning, too. Just this morning, a dad with two young kids in a cargo bike came sailing through an intersection without stopping at the 4-way stop. A car had already entered the intersection to cross it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

So when the Mayor accounced Concept C and all the Ward 4 residents and Maryland commuters started bullying people into signing a petition, including businesses; flooding politicians with emails, what was that? Not a hissy fit?

The only reason bike advocates didn't do their own petition is because the political leadership, transportation planners and engineers agreed that Concept C was the right decision. The ANCs, Councilmembers (past and current) and Mayor all agreed as well.

The opponents threw a hissy fit, right?

Well, now the people who want a safer Connecticut Avenue will throw one too.

[Anonymous]

So you admit that you are throwing a hissy fit and decided to add racial dogwhistles to it as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you admit that you are throwing a hissy fit and decided to add racial dogwhistles to it as well?

All day every day you, poster, keep me so entertained with your awful takes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you admit that you are throwing a hissy fit and decided to add racial dogwhistles to it as well?

All day every day you, poster, keep me so entertained with your awful takes.

+1 (as they say here)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of bad vehicle driver behavior, but the myopic entitlement of some cyclists is concerning, too. Just this morning, a dad with two young kids in a cargo bike came sailing through an intersection without stopping at the 4-way stop. A car had already entered the intersection to cross it.

This happened to me the other day. I was turning left at a four way stop and a cyclist came flying in front of me, with a small child on the back of his bike. I had to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting him and laid on the horn and the cyclist acted like he did nothing wrong. Poor child. Son of an idiot who's going to get him killed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of bad vehicle driver behavior, but the myopic entitlement of some cyclists is concerning, too. Just this morning, a dad with two young kids in a cargo bike came sailing through an intersection without stopping at the 4-way stop. A car had already entered the intersection to cross it.

This happened to me the other day. I was turning left at a four way stop and a cyclist came flying in front of me, with a small child on the back of his bike. I had to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting him and laid on the horn and the cyclist acted like he did nothing wrong. Poor child. Son of an idiot who's going to get him killed.

You can tell bicyclists don't actually think the roads/drivers are as dangerous as they like to pretend here. If they did, they wouldnt put their kids on bikes.