Connecticut Avenue bike lane officially dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

DP, but there are music studios in Cleveland Park and Chevy Chase, there are gyms with kids classes up and down the Avenue, there are schools that hold classes including UDC, Burke, Murch, Eaton, I mean, if you have kids and use the resources in the area, it is a lot easier to bike than drive and try to park, but biking is too dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

Bump ours that buses will have to navigate and ultimately preclude bus lanes in the future are a horrendous idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

I wish DC cyclists weren't so militant. My spouse has had the car hood thumped, water squirted in him from enraged cyclists. Just makes me over them..I can't imagine smacking a cyclists handlebars or squirting them with water in anger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

I wish DC cyclists weren't so militant. My spouse has had the car hood thumped, water squirted in him from enraged cyclists. Just makes me over them..I can't imagine smacking a cyclists handlebars or squirting them with water in anger.

Sounds like your spouse drives pretty dangerously

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

DP, but there are music studios in Cleveland Park and Chevy Chase, there are gyms with kids classes up and down the Avenue, there are schools that hold classes including UDC, Burke, Murch, Eaton, I mean, if you have kids and use the resources in the area, it is a lot easier to bike than drive and try to park, but biking is too dangerous.

It's very easy to walk and take the bus if needing to go further. PP was saying that they were unable to walk or drive and biking was the only option. Metro and metrobus didn't even merit a consideration for them. For that PP bicycling is the end all and be all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dear bicyclists:

HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA. FU.

Sincerely,

Everyone.

EVERYONE.

[Anonymous]

Could the bike lanes fit on Reno Rd? That’s a solution that might make everyone happy since it’s a scenic north-south residential street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

Bump ours that buses will have to navigate and ultimately preclude bus lanes in the future are a horrendous idea.

That's what they're going with and as a pedestrian I'll be happy for them as long as they last. Figure out how to ride your bike without threatening pedestrians and maybe then I'll support more bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

Bump ours that buses will have to navigate and ultimately preclude bus lanes in the future are a horrendous idea.

That's what they're going with and as a pedestrian I'll be happy for them as long as they last. Figure out how to ride your bike without threatening pedestrians and maybe then I'll support more bike lanes.

That's how I feel about drivers. Figure out how to do it without threatening us and maybe we'll make some room for you.

[Anonymous]

They built bike lanes on Old Georgetown Road. Traffic is now more congested and the bike lanes are barely used.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

Bump ours that buses will have to navigate and ultimately preclude bus lanes in the future are a horrendous idea.

That's what they're going with and as a pedestrian I'll be happy for them as long as they last. Figure out how to ride your bike without threatening pedestrians and maybe then I'll support more bike lanes.

This makes the least sense. Bike lanes was how we'd be able to ride without interacting with pedestrians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

De facto this has been the case since the pandemic. There seems to be no more enforcement of parking restrictions during rush hour even though the signs are there. It is a deeply unpleasant and frankly dangerous commute, but with Beach Drive closed, it's the only option for those of us who actually have to work for a living and go into the office.

[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:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

Bump ours that buses will have to navigate and ultimately preclude bus lanes in the future are a horrendous idea.

That's what they're going with and as a pedestrian I'll be happy for them as long as they last. Figure out how to ride your bike without threatening pedestrians and maybe then I'll support more bike lanes.

This makes the least sense. Bike lanes was how we'd be able to ride without interacting with pedestrians

This is why you're a menace. Crosswalks intersect with bike lanes all over the city. You interact with pedestrians all the time. But you don't see them because you're zoned out in your bike lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.

They’re adding bump outs. The sight distance will be increased and we won’t have to dodge the cyclists who can’t be bothered to stop or even slow down for pedestrians. It’s the best possible outcome if you care at all about pedestrian safety.

I wish DC cyclists weren't so militant. My spouse has had the car hood thumped, water squirted in him from enraged cyclists. Just makes me over them..I can't imagine smacking a cyclists handlebars or squirting them with water in anger.

Your husband probably drove way too close to a cyclist to elicit that kind of response. People don't just do that in a vacuum.