Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study after study of grid-connected cycling tracks and traffic calming suggests that this infrastructure is positive to businesses.

In NYC streets with bike lanes saw 24% higher retail sales growth than those without (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf).

Salt Lake City experienced a 25% increase in sales tax revenue for areas with lanes vs those without (https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/10/06/salt-lake-city-cuts-car-parking-adds-bike-lanes-sees-retail-boost/)

But sure, there are no studies.

You’re not doing yourself any favors by comparing central Manhattan to upper NW. There are almost zero single family homes in NYC and very few families as compared to Ward 3. Bike lanes are great if your young, childless, and live in a high rise.

What difference does it make whether a family lives in a single family house versus a high rise? (and guess what, there are SFH in NYC and magnitudes more families in NYC than DC)

That would be the fundental difference between an urban and a suburban area.

Uh, last time I checked, DC was a city and urban. Please explain.

Really?

Yes, DC is a city. We want grown up transportation options, not the one-size-fits-all suburban, auto-centric BS from 1950.

You're the one demanding a one size fits all solution

How so? I am supporting the ability to drive, bike or walk safely.

No, you're not. You're calling for a downtown urban plan for an uptown suburban area that will make driving, biking and walking less safe in the area.

The whole 'reimainging CT Ave" is about safety - bike lanes, pedestrian buffer, more crosswalks etc.

That makes it safer for all modes of transportation. Keeping the status quo is dangerous, as the flipped car last week illustrates.

DC streets are quite safe. Only about 40 people per year die on DC streets, out of probably tens of millions of trips. You're 100 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime, statistics show.

It's strange who the boys in spandex act like 4,000 violent crimes per year is a small number, so small that no one really needs to worry about it, but 40 people dying in traffic accidents is a huge number.

The point is to make the streets safer so more people will bike, take the bus, and kids can walk to school. There’s zero reason why the desire of Mr “I commute in from MD and am entitled to drive 50mph the whole way” should take precedence.

I’m currently mulling over a bunch of different places to move including along Connecticut, and this discussion reminded me that the protected bike lanes arw a huge plus for the neighborhood.

At some point, majority should rule, right? If 30,000 people are using Connecticut avenue every day right now, maybe that's a wee bit more important than what nine white guys who really into bikes want...

The majority did rule, by virtue of the elections which resulted in a near majority of ANC commissioners, the councilmember, and the Mayor all supporting this. Perchane YOU are in the minority, despite the echo chamber of moderated listservs telling you otherwise. Have you considered that the moderators of the Cleveland Park and Chevy Chase groups won't let many of the pro-bike neighbors post on their forums?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study after study of grid-connected cycling tracks and traffic calming suggests that this infrastructure is positive to businesses.

In NYC streets with bike lanes saw 24% higher retail sales growth than those without (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf).

Salt Lake City experienced a 25% increase in sales tax revenue for areas with lanes vs those without (https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/10/06/salt-lake-city-cuts-car-parking-adds-bike-lanes-sees-retail-boost/)

But sure, there are no studies.

You’re not doing yourself any favors by comparing central Manhattan to upper NW. There are almost zero single family homes in NYC and very few families as compared to Ward 3. Bike lanes are great if your young, childless, and live in a high rise.

What difference does it make whether a family lives in a single family house versus a high rise? (and guess what, there are SFH in NYC and magnitudes more families in NYC than DC)

That would be the fundental difference between an urban and a suburban area.

Uh, last time I checked, DC was a city and urban. Please explain.

Really?

Yes, DC is a city. We want grown up transportation options, not the one-size-fits-all suburban, auto-centric BS from 1950.

You're the one demanding a one size fits all solution

How so? I am supporting the ability to drive, bike or walk safely.

No, you're not. You're calling for a downtown urban plan for an uptown suburban area that will make driving, biking and walking less safe in the area.

The whole 'reimainging CT Ave" is about safety - bike lanes, pedestrian buffer, more crosswalks etc.

That makes it safer for all modes of transportation. Keeping the status quo is dangerous, as the flipped car last week illustrates.

DC streets are quite safe. Only about 40 people per year die on DC streets, out of probably tens of millions of trips. You're 100 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime, statistics show.

It's strange who the boys in spandex act like 4,000 violent crimes per year is a small number, so small that no one really needs to worry about it, but 40 people dying in traffic accidents is a huge number.

The point is to make the streets safer so more people will bike, take the bus, and kids can walk to school. There’s zero reason why the desire of Mr “I commute in from MD and am entitled to drive 50mph the whole way” should take precedence.

I’m currently mulling over a bunch of different places to move including along Connecticut, and this discussion reminded me that the protected bike lanes arw a huge plus for the neighborhood.

At some point, majority should rule, right? If 30,000 people are using Connecticut avenue every day right now, maybe that's a wee bit more important than what nine white guys who really into bikes want...

Are you familiar with "democracy" and "voting"

The relevant elected leaders of DC support this plan bc their constituents support this plan. The majority is ruling

This is some looking glass sh*t. This Connecticut street project is wildly unpopular. Almost everyone thinks its crazy, which is why our government is not even allowing the public to comment on it.

"almost everyone" who lives in a single family/neighborhood email group bubble.

Many SFH residents support it as do most of the people who,. you know, LIVE on Ct Ave. It is a quality of life thing. Why would you want to live on a highway when you could live on a street that is much more humane and pleasant?

The mayor gets this, DDOT gets it, the Ward 3 Councilmember gets it as do almost all of the impacted elected officials, who kept tallies on the comments and feedback of their constituents. So, no, "almost everybody: is not opposed to this and to the contrary, there is almost uniform support. The only people opposing it are the entitled single family homeowners who feel like they need to be able to drive and park a few blocks so they don't have to walk.

[Anonymous]

Your continued repetition of "win all around" and "uniform support" does not make those things true. The fact that there are 13 pages of discussion here and that the moderator of the "NIMBY" listserv had to shut down the discussion there to keep it from getting out of hand are demonstration enough that there is not uniform support.

[Anonymous]

The people on that listserv are, by the way, the people who, you know, live on and around Connecticut Avenue.

[Anonymous]

I would be happy if they replaced all the bike lanes with parking spaces. It just seems silly to dedicate so much space to something that hardly anyone uses. We should be using this space in a way that benefits the most people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people on that listserv are, by the way, the people who, you know, live on and around Connecticut Avenue.

So are, you know, lots of people who support the project

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I never understand the spandex. First of all, they're too fat for spandex. We don't want to see your gross bodies. Second, they're so slow! Do they actually think wind resistance is making a difference?

heh

[Anonymous]

I do not drive, i ride the bus to work and walk for everything else - I can't stand the bikes on the road that cut off the bus constantly it is terrifying, what people are thinking biking in and out around the buses is beyond me - this is dangerous and slows down the buses which are filled with people not private cars

Many people cannot bike - unclear to me why so many of our DC tax dollars are going to support one specific part of the population would like to know what percentage of long term residents that really represents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not drive, i ride the bus to work and walk for everything else - I can't stand the bikes on the road that cut off the bus constantly it is terrifying, what people are thinking biking in and out around the buses is beyond me - this is dangerous and slows down the buses which are filled with people not private cars

Many people cannot bike - unclear to me why so many of our DC tax dollars are going to support one specific part of the population would like to know what percentage of long term residents that really represents

I also take the bus and can't stand the drivers in cars who cut off buses. And who cause traffic in front of buses. And who block intersections so buses can't go through them.

Many people can't bike and also many people can't drive. Why are we dedicating six lanes of traffic in a highly urban area only to those who can drive?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study after study of grid-connected cycling tracks and traffic calming suggests that this infrastructure is positive to businesses.

In NYC streets with bike lanes saw 24% higher retail sales growth than those without (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf).

Salt Lake City experienced a 25% increase in sales tax revenue for areas with lanes vs those without (https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/10/06/salt-lake-city-cuts-car-parking-adds-bike-lanes-sees-retail-boost/)

But sure, there are no studies.

You’re not doing yourself any favors by comparing central Manhattan to upper NW. There are almost zero single family homes in NYC and very few families as compared to Ward 3. Bike lanes are great if your young, childless, and live in a high rise.

What difference does it make whether a family lives in a single family house versus a high rise? (and guess what, there are SFH in NYC and magnitudes more families in NYC than DC)

That would be the fundental difference between an urban and a suburban area.

Uh, last time I checked, DC was a city and urban. Please explain.

Really?

Yes, DC is a city. We want grown up transportation options, not the one-size-fits-all suburban, auto-centric BS from 1950.

You're the one demanding a one size fits all solution

How so? I am supporting the ability to drive, bike or walk safely.

No, you're not. You're calling for a downtown urban plan for an uptown suburban area that will make driving, biking and walking less safe in the area.

The whole 'reimainging CT Ave" is about safety - bike lanes, pedestrian buffer, more crosswalks etc.

That makes it safer for all modes of transportation. Keeping the status quo is dangerous, as the flipped car last week illustrates.

DC streets are quite safe. Only about 40 people per year die on DC streets, out of probably tens of millions of trips. You're 100 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime, statistics show.

It's strange who the boys in spandex act like 4,000 violent crimes per year is a small number, so small that no one really needs to worry about it, but 40 people dying in traffic accidents is a huge number.

The point is to make the streets safer so more people will bike, take the bus, and kids can walk to school. There’s zero reason why the desire of Mr “I commute in from MD and am entitled to drive 50mph the whole way” should take precedence.

I’m currently mulling over a bunch of different places to move including along Connecticut, and this discussion reminded me that the protected bike lanes arw a huge plus for the neighborhood.

At some point, majority should rule, right? If 30,000 people are using Connecticut avenue every day right now, maybe that's a wee bit more important than what nine white guys who really into bikes want...

Are you familiar with "democracy" and "voting"

The relevant elected leaders of DC support this plan bc their constituents support this plan. The majority is ruling

This is some looking glass sh*t. This Connecticut street project is wildly unpopular. Almost everyone thinks its crazy, which is why our government is not even allowing the public to comment on it.

https://ddot.dc.gov/page/connecticut-avenue-nw-reversible-lane-safety-and-operations-study

At least six public meetings plus a link to a 31-page document with Q/A from DDOT in response to comments from interested parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understand the spandex. First of all, they're too fat for spandex. We don't want to see your gross bodies. Second, they're so slow! Do they actually think wind resistance is making a difference?

heh

Yes, body-shaming the people who do a good thing for the environment and their health by riding bikes is a great way to make your point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not drive, i ride the bus to work and walk for everything else - I can't stand the bikes on the road that cut off the bus constantly it is terrifying, what people are thinking biking in and out around the buses is beyond me - this is dangerous and slows down the buses which are filled with people not private cars

Many people cannot bike - unclear to me why so many of our DC tax dollars are going to support one specific part of the population would like to know what percentage of long term residents that really represents

Great news for you then! Protected bike lanes will help with this issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understand the spandex. First of all, they're too fat for spandex. We don't want to see your gross bodies. Second, they're so slow! Do they actually think wind resistance is making a difference?

heh

Yes, body-shaming the people who do a good thing for the environment and their health by riding bikes is a great way to make your point

Fatties! In spandex! On bikes! Going so slow! But acting like they're running a marathon! What's not to like?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study after study of grid-connected cycling tracks and traffic calming suggests that this infrastructure is positive to businesses.

In NYC streets with bike lanes saw 24% higher retail sales growth than those without (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf).

Salt Lake City experienced a 25% increase in sales tax revenue for areas with lanes vs those without (https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/10/06/salt-lake-city-cuts-car-parking-adds-bike-lanes-sees-retail-boost/)

But sure, there are no studies.

You’re not doing yourself any favors by comparing central Manhattan to upper NW. There are almost zero single family homes in NYC and very few families as compared to Ward 3. Bike lanes are great if your young, childless, and live in a high rise.

What difference does it make whether a family lives in a single family house versus a high rise? (and guess what, there are SFH in NYC and magnitudes more families in NYC than DC)

That would be the fundental difference between an urban and a suburban area.

Uh, last time I checked, DC was a city and urban. Please explain.

Really?

Yes, DC is a city. We want grown up transportation options, not the one-size-fits-all suburban, auto-centric BS from 1950.

You're the one demanding a one size fits all solution

How so? I am supporting the ability to drive, bike or walk safely.

No, you're not. You're calling for a downtown urban plan for an uptown suburban area that will make driving, biking and walking less safe in the area.

The whole 'reimainging CT Ave" is about safety - bike lanes, pedestrian buffer, more crosswalks etc.

That makes it safer for all modes of transportation. Keeping the status quo is dangerous, as the flipped car last week illustrates.

DC streets are quite safe. Only about 40 people per year die on DC streets, out of probably tens of millions of trips. You're 100 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime, statistics show.

It's strange who the boys in spandex act like 4,000 violent crimes per year is a small number, so small that no one really needs to worry about it, but 40 people dying in traffic accidents is a huge number.

The point is to make the streets safer so more people will bike, take the bus, and kids can walk to school. There’s zero reason why the desire of Mr “I commute in from MD and am entitled to drive 50mph the whole way” should take precedence.

I’m currently mulling over a bunch of different places to move including along Connecticut, and this discussion reminded me that the protected bike lanes arw a huge plus for the neighborhood.

At some point, majority should rule, right? If 30,000 people are using Connecticut avenue every day right now, maybe that's a wee bit more important than what nine white guys who really into bikes want...

Are you familiar with "democracy" and "voting"

The relevant elected leaders of DC support this plan bc their constituents support this plan. The majority is ruling

This is some looking glass sh*t. This Connecticut street project is wildly unpopular. Almost everyone thinks its crazy, which is why our government is not even allowing the public to comment on it.

How is the government not allowing the public to comment? There were 50 public meetings and a formal DDOT public comment period.

[Anonymous]

The roads are a scarce resource - at any given time on any given block the ratio of non-bikers to other people in vehicles including public transportation or walking is huge - yet so many resources money and space are dedicated to bikes - which seems like a giant waste. It is delusional to think that adding more bike lanes will change that ratio in any material way.