Forum Index
»
Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
THIS kind of post is what makes me think there is one oe a handful of trolls here. |
Anonymous
Are you joking or just a bad liar? It is flat from the Zoo to Rodman. It is even slightly downhill from Upton to Yuma and also slightly downhill from Everett to Nebraska. The areas of elevation gain on Connecticut are quite steep as anyone who lives in the area knows and for people who live outside the area, you would be able to figure out from looking at a topographic map. But sure, you bike it every day. 
|
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
|
Brandywine, Davenport or Tilden coming out of Rock Creek Park are steep,. Connecticut Avenue is not steep.
I am getting a clearer picture of the issue. Anything that isn't flat or downhill is a challenge to traverse. |
Anonymous
| As a pedestrian - the bike proponents should speak for themselves and stop trying to act like they have an altruistic interest in pedestrians - the ability for bikes to go through intersections w/out stopping and hopefully yielding to pedestrians (not better for pedestrians), the lanes that hide the cross walk from the sidewalk forcing pedestrians into the bike lane to try to see if they can cross (not better for pedestrians), the confused cars down town weaving all over because it is impossible to follow the lines (like on 20th street) not better for pedestrians, having to walk further to a cross walk because of bike lane changes encouraging peds to cross w/out a cross walk - not better for pedestrians - I am 1000% in favor for reducting cars speed but believe that is a fake claim just to redo the infrastructure in favor of bikes making walking around much more difficult, |
Anonymous
I haven't ridden a bike in a couple of years now, but NDD and Lee Mayer's constant haranguing (the latter on the CP listserve) pushed me from "bike lanes, fine whatever" to "these people are unhinged. Bike lanes everywhere!" |
Anonymous
I’m sure that there are annoying people on every side, but objectively, the unhinged in DC seem to be consistently on the anti-bike lane side. |
Anonymous
Bikers are invariably also pedestrians. I don’t know what to tell you - these projects are professionally designed to create safer conditions *for pedestrians*. Please look at the plans and attend the public meetings, where you can ask DDOT to explain. The fantasy that this is about prioritizing bikes above all else is just that - a fantasy. |
Anonymous
| I just find it hard to believe that there are 3000 people along the corridor that are going to ride their bikes downtown in all weather with a backpack full of professional shoes/clothes, shower upon arrival, and then do the reverse at the end of the day. I know DDOT has their projections, but the studies could use a scrub from someone who specializes in human behavior. Of course some young folks and older PBS devotees will do it, but not 3000. So maybe 500 people per day? |
Anonymous
I don’t. And if they take the bus or metro on the bad weather days so what? |
Anonymous
You find it hard to believe because you have been sucked in by the American propaganda of open roads and freedom that result from advertising by the automotive industry and the follow on development patterns that are auto-centric. That has been the message in the post WW2 era. It doesn't work. We don't have unlimited land to build single family homes with the corresponding cul-de-sacs and suburban sprawl development. We don't have the opportunity to continue to widen our roads to accommodate cars. We don't have the opportunity to undo the damage done to the health of our citizenry in the form of asthma and obesity. We do have the opportunity to design for a future that ensure better health and environmental outcomes, by making it easier and safer for people to walk and bike and by prioritizing mass transit and away from single occupancy cars. So, just because YOU find it hard to believe ignores the evidence from other American cities and other cities from around the world, where leadership have made other choices that result in these better outcomes,. including a more human and livable streetscape. There is simply no reason to accept the crappy built environment and transportation choices made over the 20th century that negatively impact us today. Let's design for a better future, whether you believe it or not, the proof of concept has been realized elsewhere. |
Anonymous
Again an amazing amount of inaccurate information in one post. This discussion would be much better if the handful of people complaining about the proposal and process had actually been participating and had read about the proposal. This process in fact is not just about adding protected bike lanes and never has been - it has always been about re-making CT Ave into a safe multi-modal street which you would know if you'd attended any of the endless meetings that have been held instead of ignorantly posting on DCUM. Let's go through your misstatements: the ability for bikes to go through intersections w/out stopping and hopefully yielding to pedestrians (not better for pedestrians) This is not the law in DC and is not proposed in the most recently passed vision zero legislation. the lanes that hide the cross walk from the sidewalk forcing pedestrians into the bike lane to try to see if they can cross It is not clear what you are talking about here - pedestrians would cross at intersections today just like they do now - crosswalks would not be hidden from the sidewalk whatever that even means. the confused cars down town weaving all over because it is impossible to follow the lines (like on 20th street) Again don't know what you are talking about - lane markings are pretty easy to follow but in any case pedestrians would still be crossing at signalized intersections. having to walk further to a cross walk because of bike lane changes encouraging peds to cross w/out a cross walk Again no idea what this means - if you want to make a riskier street crossing by crossing mid-block instead of at a signal you can still do that but in the future you will have one less car lane to traverse so it in fact will be safer (there is a buffer between the bike lane and the car travel lane so you will as a pedestrian have a safe place to stand while waiting to do this). The Ward 3 DC Pedestrian Advisory Committee member has been very active in this process and she is very militant about pedestrian safety and is supportive of this project. Among the pedestrian improvements: Additional Hawk signals Pedestrian Refuge Islands Lowered speed limit Narrower road to cross No more bikes or scooters on the sidewalk All of the crossing times at signals for pedestrians are being studied Bus stop relocations are being studied and among the things being looked at is proximity to apartment buildings and retail to shorten walks I can already anticipate the response - "Why can't we have the pedestrian safety improvements without the bike lanes?" and the answer is that this is a multi-modal study that is looking to make improvements for all users of the corridor (including for drivers and businesses BTW) and if you'd been attending the meetings you'd know that from the beginning this process was motivated by the fact that the corridor has long been unsafe for all of its users and its goal is to improve safety for all of its users. It is unfortunate that even in the face of very public evidence about what this study is doing opponents who haven't been engaged in this arduous process are focused on one component rather than the entirety of what is being done. |
Anonymous
That's not where the bike lanes are going, though. When I bike on Connecticut (now, not in the theoretical post-bike-lane future), I go from downtown to Adams Morgan and then turn onto Connecticut after the bridge at Calvert. The uphill grade from there to the Maryland line is perfectly manageable. |
Anonymous
My office alone has between 80 and 100 bike commuters on any given day. (Our company employs about 2,000 people, and it's not a particularly young or childless staff -- there are definitely more people in the parents' Slack channel than the bike commute Slack channel, for instance.) Do they all ride down Connecticut? No, definitely not. But if you have five or six employers downtown where about 5 percent of the staff commutes by bike, that alone gets to your 500. So I think your math doesn't work out quite as dismissively as you think it does. |
Anonymous
THANK YOU. |