Bike lanes that literally no one uses -- why are we still doing this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

You clearly don't watch anyone driving a car in DC. Really sounds like you're insecure and projecting too. We can all read about Trump cancelling funding for bike projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full American idiocy on display. And not only that, but doubling down on it too.

American car culture sucks ass, and so does American urban planning.

Traditional American urban planning absolutely does not suck it is thw best part of America. The end result of Urbanist lunacy promoted by YIMBYs and biker bros is everyone living tiny expensive Soviet style apartments towers. Don’t ruin the suburbs you don’t even live in with mixed used 24 hour bars (in residential neighborhoods) and high density apartments.

If suburbanism really was that great, you wouldn't be here complaining about a few bike lanes in DC.

Obviously you and your neighbors hate your commutes and are absolutely miserable from it, and you can't stand the idea of anyone not being as miserable as you. Especially those city folks.

Sorry your plan to live 30 miles from work and hurtle into town in a 5,000 pound SUV isn't working out like you dreamed. Maybe you would be less stressed out if you worked in the same burb that you live? Then you wouldn't have to face the two-wheeled scourge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full American idiocy on display. And not only that, but doubling down on it too.

American car culture sucks ass, and so does American urban planning.

Traditional American urban planning absolutely does not suck it is thw best part of America. The end result of Urbanist lunacy promoted by YIMBYs and biker bros is everyone living tiny expensive Soviet style apartments towers. Don’t ruin the suburbs you don’t even live in with mixed used 24 hour bars (in residential neighborhoods) and high density apartments.

Roflmao.

Clealry you haven't traveled much. You know who has great urban planning? A country like Japan, for example. Driving is minimized. Almost every town and city has access to a train station where you can get on affordable trains to go virtually anywhere. You have local markets in almost every town where you can shop by biking to it.

US car centric culture sucks so much ass. Americans now shell out $40, 50, 60, 70k every 5-10 years for a new car. They pay $1-3k per year to insure it. Then they have to pay all of the money to maintain them and for gas. And Americans wonder why they retire poor and broke. The US' shiiit poor urban planning is a big reason. Americans are forced to drive everywhere in cars they can't really afford. People are now dumping $200, 300, and 500k+ into worthless cars that go to $0 over the course of a lifetime of ownership. US urban planning BLOWS.

[Anonymous]

Because Pete Buttigieg expects to be back working in DC in 2028.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city is removing a protected bike lane. Good start.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/06/12/arizona-bike-lane-dc/

"It’s the first time D.C. is removing a set of protected bike lanes, cycling advocates say. They worry it’s a sign that city leaders are joining a backlash against bike infrastructure building nationally. U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy has frozen all federal grants involving cycling, recently calling bike lanes in congested areas “a problem”; cities in Texas and California are tearing them out. Last year D.C. canceled plans for a bike lane down Connecticut Avenue NW, a key thoroughfare."

Sounds like progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Should we also mandate that pedestrians have giant name tags affixed to their heads? Any other wildly impractical - and completely pointless - ideas you want to share with the group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

According to the posters here, anytime a cyclist passes a $70k SUV stuck in traffic.

[Anonymous]

The bike lanes on Arizona Avenue seem purely punitive on Virginia drivers. My fellow DC neighbors hate them because they’ve pushed traffic into the neighborhoods. The Connecticut Ave residents were smart to fight that proposal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bike lanes on Arizona Avenue seem purely punitive on Virginia drivers. My fellow DC neighbors hate them because they’ve pushed traffic into the neighborhoods. The Connecticut Ave residents were smart to fight that proposal.

Punitive for Virginia drivers?

Arizona Ave is a residential street. The elected neighborhood commission voted to support the bike lanes unanimously.

DC transportation policy should prioritize the safety of local residents, not the convenience of suburban commuters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full American idiocy on display. And not only that, but doubling down on it too.

American car culture sucks ass, and so does American urban planning.

Traditional American urban planning absolutely does not suck it is thw best part of America. The end result of Urbanist lunacy promoted by YIMBYs and biker bros is everyone living tiny expensive Soviet style apartments towers. Don’t ruin the suburbs you don’t even live in with mixed used 24 hour bars (in residential neighborhoods) and high density apartments.

If suburbanism really was that great, you wouldn't be here complaining about a few bike lanes in DC.

Obviously you and your neighbors hate your commutes and are absolutely miserable from it, and you can't stand the idea of anyone not being as miserable as you. Especially those city folks.

Sorry your plan to live 30 miles from work and hurtle into town in a 5,000 pound SUV isn't working out like you dreamed. Maybe you would be less stressed out if you worked in the same burb that you live? Then you wouldn't have to face the two-wheeled scourge.

I’m complaining about bike lanes because they are trying to put them in my suburban area where no one will use them. They are poorly utilized in DC and it doesn’t even make sense to put them there either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full American idiocy on display. And not only that, but doubling down on it too.

American car culture sucks ass, and so does American urban planning.

Traditional American urban planning absolutely does not suck it is thw best part of America. The end result of Urbanist lunacy promoted by YIMBYs and biker bros is everyone living tiny expensive Soviet style apartments towers. Don’t ruin the suburbs you don’t even live in with mixed used 24 hour bars (in residential neighborhoods) and high density apartments.

If suburbanism really was that great, you wouldn't be here complaining about a few bike lanes in DC.

Obviously you and your neighbors hate your commutes and are absolutely miserable from it, and you can't stand the idea of anyone not being as miserable as you. Especially those city folks.

Sorry your plan to live 30 miles from work and hurtle into town in a 5,000 pound SUV isn't working out like you dreamed. Maybe you would be less stressed out if you worked in the same burb that you live? Then you wouldn't have to face the two-wheeled scourge.

I’m complaining about bike lanes because they are trying to put them in my suburban area where no one will use them. They are poorly utilized in DC and it doesn’t even make sense to put them there either.

We have bike lanes out here in suburbia too. Storck uses them once or twice a year for his tours of south county. Completely worth it!

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/mountvernon/tourdemountvernon.htm

Note, our area has been rebranded Potomac Banks to make it more attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lanes on Arizona Avenue seem purely punitive on Virginia drivers. My fellow DC neighbors hate them because they’ve pushed traffic into the neighborhoods. The Connecticut Ave residents were smart to fight that proposal.

Punitive for Virginia drivers?

Arizona Ave is a residential street. The elected neighborhood commission voted to support the bike lanes unanimously.

DC transportation policy should prioritize the safety of local residents, not the convenience of suburban commuters.

Around 40% of DCs total property tax revenue is from office buildings. Commuters account for more than 10% of all sales tax revenue. Good luck funding the local government without considering the needs of office workers and commuters. The office worker commuters contribute significantly to the DC tax revenue base and they use hardly any local government resources.