What would it ACTUALLY take for you to consider biking or taking the bus, in lieu of motoring?

[Anonymous]

When you can guarantee it never rains, snows, and the temperature not drop below 65 degrees.

[Anonymous]

I’ve been commuting from MoCo to DC for 20+ years down CT Ave to the White House area.

I rarely see more than 2 or 3 cyclists each way.

I cannot imagine having to navigate around more bikers. It will be dangerous. It will slow down traffic. Slow car traffic heightens tempers.

I see full buses. I see groups of people waiting for buses. I cannot imagine adding more buses (which already come regularly during commuter times) is cost effective.

Plus: crime. People steal the fancy bikes that dc folks ride. In my old building, the 3 staff who hiked to work brought them into their offices. My new office has a garage with bike lockers. We still only have 2 or 3 people who bike to work.

And crime on buses and metro is worse today than it was years ago. I actually used metro for 5 years (2000-2005). It was crowded but tolerable. It was also cheaper than paying for parking downtown. Now it’s a wash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not in your area, but for me to use bikes as a mode of transport I’d need dedicated bike lanes that are raised and fenced off from the road (ie much safer) ALL THE WAY. I’m not going to be safe for some of the way then play Russian roulette for the rest.

To use buses, I’d need to know they were safe and clean (no gangs, homeless or other crazies) and there would need to be “green roads and bridges” that only buses and bikes can use that significantly reduce travel time especially during rush hour.

I’ve lived in other places in the world that have these things and they really do work.

Homeless people also have places to go. They might be traveling from a shelter to a social services office to a medical clinic to the library to apply for a job. And many more people are experiencing homelessness than the folks sitting outside the Starbucks. It includes mothers transporting their young children to school and even people with jobs. If you are worried about people who smell or have paranoid schizophrenia state that specifically, though that isn’t limited to homeless people.

So you believe that transit should prioritize the needs of homeless riders over all others? Interesting perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone has summed up the very reasonable objections. No way any of these can be fixed

Yes, boomers and gen X'ers must keep polluting the planet relentlessly with their personal automobile addiction until they push daisies, because their hubris won't let them admit that the way they architected things led to the current toxic built environment and relentless global warming. Got it.

Don’t blame Gen X for setting things up this way. Honestly, some of the build architecture choices around our cities and suburbs aren’t even Boomers’ fault — the interstate highway system and the development of car-friendly suburbs was the result of choices their parents’ generation made.

[Anonymous]

I am physically disabled so my car is my mobility aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone has summed up the very reasonable objections. No way any of these can be fixed

Yes, boomers and gen X'ers must keep polluting the planet relentlessly with their personal automobile addiction until they push daisies, because their hubris won't let them admit that the way they architected things led to the current toxic built environment and relentless global warming. Got it.

Don’t blame Gen X for setting things up this way. Honestly, some of the build architecture choices around our cities and suburbs aren’t even Boomers’ fault — the interstate highway system and the development of car-friendly suburbs was the result of choices their parents’ generation made.

+1. I'm Gen-X. For most of my time in the DC area, I've taken public transport to work (bus or metro, depending on where I was living). But things change when you have kids or marry someone that (gasp) works on the opposite side of the city as you. Seems like some Gen-Zers haven't had to grapple with those realities yet.

[Anonymous]

to get me to bike, we'd have to go back in time and erase the numerous times I've been hit by a car or otherwise had dangerous experiences cycling. I don't feel like it is safe (and that's not just about drivers).

[Anonymous]

For my job to be fully remote. I'm an elementary teacher, and the private time I get in my car with my 90s jams is often a humble highlight. You can take that joy from my cold dead hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sweat profusely. Been that way all my life. I sweat at the drop of a hat even a teen and 20-something multi-sport athlete. Cultural norms and acceptance around sweat and resulting odor would have to change.

Also, speed limits on bike routes would have to be imposed and low enough to accommodate walkers and children.

Why do walkers and children need to be on bike routes?

Currently the so-called “bike paths” here are multi-modal, meaning they are for everyone. Bike lanes should also accommodate other forms of human propelled vehicles like scooters. Kids ride bikes with parents and alone but cannot bike at high speeds. Basically the lycra brigade would need to be curbed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sweat profusely. Been that way all my life. I sweat at the drop of a hat even a teen and 20-something multi-sport athlete. Cultural norms and acceptance around sweat and resulting odor would have to change.

Also, speed limits on bike routes would have to be imposed and low enough to accommodate walkers and children.

Why do walkers and children need to be on bike routes?

Is this a serious question? Most off road bike trails are multi-use, meaning for pedestrians too. I mean the ones that go through parks or on the sides of roads separated by grass, not bike lanes within the roadway. And children bike places for transportation, too.

Yeah, those aren't really bike routes. With the "shared use" paths, the shared use is non-ideal for both pedestrians and bicyclists.

Hmm. My co-workers must’ve taken some fictional W&OD trail to/from work. Those are literally the ones that are most direct for them. If bike lanes created on streets become the norm, the entitlement of the cyclists on the W&OD will only increase.

[Anonymous]

Another thing that would need to happen is wider streets that accommodate more modes of travel. Buildings that are put a sidewalk width from the road do not work. Setbacks need to be generous.

[Anonymous]

Because you asked:

Public transport - allow food and drink. Need my coffee. Lots of cops to prevent metro violence.
Bus - take me right to my door. Too hot or cold or wet to walk. True for metro too - be like other countries with miles of connected underground.
Bike - dedicated bike lanes never interacting with traffic and cars. Mandatory free daily bike storage in all DC parking garages.

[Anonymous]

When you can guarantee it never rains, snows, and the temperature not drop below 65 degrees.

wat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sweat profusely. Been that way all my life. I sweat at the drop of a hat even a teen and 20-something multi-sport athlete. Cultural norms and acceptance around sweat and resulting odor would have to change.

Also, speed limits on bike routes would have to be imposed and low enough to accommodate walkers and children.

Why do walkers and children need to be on bike routes?

Is this a serious question? Most off road bike trails are multi-use, meaning for pedestrians too. I mean the ones that go through parks or on the sides of roads separated by grass, not bike lanes within the roadway. And children bike places for transportation, too.

Yeah, those aren't really bike routes. With the "shared use" paths, the shared use is non-ideal for both pedestrians and bicyclists.

Because cyclist don’t know how to share.

I really don’t get this sharing mantra that is being thrown left and ride. “Share the road” now “share the bike route”. If the city is serious about bikes as a transport means, they cannot “share” routes with cars or with pedestrians. We are not talking about weekend trails. At least that’s not how I understood the OP. It is using a bike as means of transport. You cannot mix different speeds and expect there not to be issues or injuries. Bikes and cars cannot share road. And similarly, a bike cannot go at speed of pedestrians - that can work for a weekend / recreational purpose, but not if you need to get to work daily, or using it as means of transport.

The key issue, is that bikes are being looked at as optional or recreation use, not as means of transport. This is why countries like Germany, Netherlands, etc have dedicated bike lanes. Not mixing bikes either with cars where they are in danger, or with pedestrians who may be injured by bikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you can guarantee it never rains, snows, and the temperature not drop below 65 degrees.

You could also, like, Metro or bike on days when it's not raining or snowing, and drive when the weather is bad. Does it have to be all or nothing?