Connecticut Avenue bike lane officially dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lane plan was brought to us by the supporters of the Defund the Police movement and the Connecticut Ave housing voucher fan boys. Times up, we've seen your prior work and are not fans.

Actually, it was a result of over 50 public meetings and engineering experts at DDOT with the support of the ANCs and the current and former Councilmembers.

We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 80 years. There isn't space on our streets, there isn't time with respect to climate change so we need to do something else that is more accommodating for the 21st Century.

I do not understand why bike-lane supporters think "well, the majority of ANC commissioners supported this" is such a cogent reason for everyone to support it. Most of those commissioners -- who, for the millionth time, have no actual power -- were elected thanks to like 300 people who came out to actually vote, hardly a mandate. It's such a dumb argument, yet they trot it out over and over. No wonder Bowser ignored them.

ANCs are the interns of city government. They are a glorified 311 service. No one cares what they think about anything, which is why so few people bother voting in ANC elections.

+1

Many of the ANCs now want to get paid! I will give them this, they are committed socialists.

Actually, some of them really are socialists.

[Anonymous]

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?

"Mayor Muriel Bowser Presents... Equally Sh!tty Outcomes for All!"

Isn't that like her crime and voucher strategy?

[Anonymous]

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.

As someone who hasn’t been following this too closely, I find this outcome pretty amusing. Sounds like it’s the worst of all possible outcomes for everyone - drivers, bikers, bus-riders and pedestrians. But cheapest for the city since it’s in a budget crunch. Congrats to everyone who uses Connecticut Ave! Looks like that road will be even shittier than ever.

[Anonymous]

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.

There's already a bike lane in Rock Creek park that is away from all automobile traffic. If people wanted to bike, they already have the infrastructure to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Though it does appear to be a pyrrhic victory for commuters - both sides of Connecticut will be available for parking 24/7, with bump outs for traffic calming, meaning the right lane on each side will be unavailable to drivers.

Can't Reno Road carry more of the traffic? Share the burden all around.

Reno is back-to-back traffic already. But it does have bike lanes for those who want to use it. Few do.

[Anonymous]

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.

Imagine spending tens of thousands of dollars - and in the process emitting noxious chemicals that make life worse on the planet, endangering all manner of other road users, and consuming a vast array of public subsidies - on a commute that you could do for free on a bicycle or a few dollars on WMATA and then claiming others are entitled . . .

Your complete and utter lack of self-awareness is absolutely hysterical.

And your assumption that “everyone can and should bike or take WMATA” isn’t?

What a cute edge case. DC could build bike lanes until the cows come home and still have more than enough roads to accommodate the small proportion of suburban commuters who are physically unable to ride a bike, take WMATA, or carpool.

You love to make this about “suburban commuters” but plenty of people who live in the affected neighborhoods oppose adding bike lanes for a multitude of reasons.

I can make things too. But I won’t. In the real world, those neighborhoods elected ANC reps and a Councilmember that overwhelmingly supported the bike lanes. Proposal C, unlike the mayor’s diktat, was the product of a lengthy process of community consultation.

Get back to us after the next election about those ANC reps. People didn't have other options in most cases. And we all know those ANC reps gave a literal FU to their constituents. And many of those ANC reps ran opposed as part of a strategy by Greater Greater Washington to try to stack the ANCs with their candidates in elections where people tended to pay little attention. Next election cycle will be different. People have woken up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor bike bros. Major win for pedestrians.

This is worst case for pedestrians and drivers. Less experienced riders will trend to the sidewalks and mess up the walking experience. The lane for bikes that is down reserved for parking will clog the right lane with people on bikes and people double parked. But the best is the people celebrating as if this is a win for anyone are really the saddest. You maintained the status quo, which is a gridlock road that is somehow still a magnet for horrific traffic accidents.

Bikers still have Rock Creek Park. Half of which is now permanently blocked off for bikers so have at it!

RCP is open for bikers pedestrians runners skaters and it's a great public resource. It's not for commuting, so that's not going to change people's routes to work. I'm sorry that you dislike bikers so much. I don't really understand how you think this has a public benefit, but have a good evening.

Uh, it is open for commuting. Anybody who wishes to commute into the city can. Every single day. It's literally called a bike path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lane plan was brought to us by the supporters of the Defund the Police movement and the Connecticut Ave housing voucher fan boys. Times up, we've seen your prior work and are not fans.

Actually, it was a result of over 50 public meetings and engineering experts at DDOT with the support of the ANCs and the current and former Councilmembers.

We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 80 years. There isn't space on our streets, there isn't time with respect to climate change so we need to do something else that is more accommodating for the 21st Century.

I do not understand why bike-lane supporters think "well, the majority of ANC commissioners supported this" is such a cogent reason for everyone to support it. Most of those commissioners -- who, for the millionth time, have no actual power -- were elected thanks to like 300 people who came out to actually vote, hardly a mandate. It's such a dumb argument, yet they trot it out over and over. No wonder Bowser ignored them.

You should have just written: “It’s perfectly reasonable to contradict preferences unambiguously articulated by the local electorate and subvert established democratic processes when I disagree with electoral outcomes.”

ANCs exist almost entirely to solicit and articulate the views of the community on projects like this.

And GGW sought to stack ANC to present itself as representing the views of the community when, in fact, it didn't and doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure your numbers are correct. A quick Google search shows that in the 20015 zip code 22 percent are renters--and only 20 percent live in apartments, the rest in single family homes.
https://www.city-data.com/zips/20015.html#google_vignette

In the 20008 zip code, 64 percent are renters and about 60 percent live in apartments.
https://www.city-data.com/zips/20008.html

80% of the people live on 20% of the land on the CT Ave corridor.

There is no mention of renter versus owner. Condos are a thing on CT Ave as well.

The number is from a DDOT/OP document related to the zoning rewrite.

Show it.

[Anonymous]

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.

Not sure that plan will fit into the mayor's desperate plan to bring people back to downtown. She needs to not frustrate commuters if she wants that to happen.

[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.

That is what it seems like. I can't believe I am saying this, but I am with the bike bros here, this seems like a bad plan...

Does anyone else remember the idiotic plan to reduce traffic on Wisconsin Ave near Glover park about 10 years ago or a barrier that went up on Mass. Ave NW by the mosque/entrance to Rock Creek Parkway? The latter only lasted about a week because it was causing horrific traffic back ups. I think the same will happen here.

[Anonymous]

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.

Don't take the bait.

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 people like you sat back and let the crazy NIMBYs lie their way to 4000 petition signatures and the mayor, without evidence, decided to take their position. If you don't like the result, sign the petition for the mayor to reconsider

[Anonymous]

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.

Don't take the bait.

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 people like you sat back and let the crazy NIMBYs lie their way to 4000 petition signatures and the mayor, without evidence, decided to take their position. If you don't like the result, sign the petition for the mayor to reconsider

Dont take the bait!!!

[Anonymous]

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.

As someone who hasn’t been following this too closely, I find this outcome pretty amusing. Sounds like it’s the worst of all possible outcomes for everyone - drivers, bikers, bus-riders and pedestrians. But cheapest for the city since it’s in a budget crunch. Congrats to everyone who uses Connecticut Ave! Looks like that road will be even shittier than ever.

That’s pretty much par for the course from Muriel Bowser.

[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?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

You didn't answer the question because you are probably single and have no idea what life is like with children in the k-12 range.