Thanks to the bike party organizers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a spectacularly bad idea for people on bikes to *try* to piss off people in cars. They're going to cross the wrong person, and end up with a SUV parked on their chest.

Which is, once again, the reason we advocate so fiercely for dedicated bike lanes

Your game plan to get more bike lanes is to piss off drivers so much they want to run you over? Good luck with that. Pretty sure that's the worst advocacy campaign I've ever heard of.

To the contrary, I think it is brilliant. For the strategy simply adopts that which has worked so well for drivers. That is, when they routinely clog the roads with their vehicles (often single occupied) to the point of causing gridlock, drivers are often rewarded with extra lanes. No one can reasonably blame the cyclists for venturing that, by clogging the streets with their bicycles, our transportation officials might react in the usual manner and give them a lane or two of their own.

Wpw. Cars using roads designed for car use. How dare they???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 Dems head (and ex-ANC chair) Bo Finley is tweeting “f—- you” to bike lane skeptics. What is it about the ANC flicking off their constituents?

They're all pissed that their scheme to sneak this through during the pandemic was discovered and that their lies about overwhelming neighborhood knowledge and support were exposed.

For the nth time a disconnect has been shown between their rhetoric and their actions.

Are are over 50 public meetings, all available during and post COVID on zoom, "sneaking through?"

It is a far, far cry from the actual sneaking through that took place in the decades before when meetings were only in person at really inconvenient times for working people and parents of small kids that the ANC and CPCA routinely had. The meetings around this effort were attended by hundreds of people at a time - far more than would ever have participated in regular in-person pre-COVID ANC meetings.

Hardly undemocratic.

"Reversible Lane Study"

+1. Even the DDOT witness last week was amazed at how this somehow became primarily a bike lane project.

You mean the interim director who just came on to the scene? There are about a thousand improvements vetted under this plan, the bike lanes were one of them, but the people opposed to bike lanes will have managed to kill the whole project by the time the dust settles, because bike lanes are integral to Vision Zero, to the DC Sustainability Plan, the Net Zero plans, the clean air plans and the MoveDC plans. But hey, we need more parking so that will supercede everything else, right?

It was only the "Save Connecticut Avenue" people who made it about bike lanes.

“The inception of the project was a safety project, it has always been a safety project. . . and somehow over the years, it kind of morphed into a bike project” Doh!

Know how many cyclists died on that corridor between 1971 and 2014?? 1. And it was in 1971 and because he ran a red light. Not sure if there any more since then. But if so, it's a tiny number.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think bike lanes make sense. But I fully support bike trails. I just don’t want bikes and cars in the same place if it can be avoided.

Exactly! And that is what a closed beach Drive is for - bikes.

The same boring nonsense over and over again

So roads that are shut down for cyclists to use are nonsense? Well, I guess we don't need to consider bike lanes then. It's all nonsense, everyone!!

It's a park, not a road. It's shut down so pedestrians, bikers, skaters, animals and anyone else who wants to be out there can enjoy it without cars speeding through.

[Anonymous]

This map is from Greater Greater Washington’s website. It supposedly details all bike accidents from 1987 to 2014, but apparently they had to go back to 1971 to find one on the section of Connecticut Ave NW where the bike lanes are proposed. There’s another incident listed from 1949 on another street. They have a map that makes it look like DC is rife with bike fatalities. But it’s a farce. Check it out:

https://ggwash.org/view/amp/36219

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looked like a lot of fun unless you needed to use on of the major arteries in the city to get somewhere

This. They were all over the road and going pretty slow.

And yet, nothing they did was illegal. If you don't want this all the time, support bike lanes.

It was a one-off. There is nothing to worry about because it's not even going to happen again occasionally let alone regularly or even more absurdly all the time. Less than 100 people regularly bike on Connecticut.

100 young, unmarried cyclists who live downtown rode Uptown at night and left trash all over our park. Most of the people who actually live along the corridor were inside helping their kids with homework or at their kid’s baseball games.

It's unfortunate that people on this forum continue to try to blatantly lie. Several of the people interviewed are middle aged with families in upper NW.



https://x.com/dcsafer/status/1780799656554873305?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

DC is only 37 percent white, yet that group was almost 100 percent white. They are privileged and out of touch and think the rest of the city should adjust to them.

What percent of the Connecticut Avenue corridor is white?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weed stores are not even in to be out.
The police have not been defunded.

Normal thinking is understanding we have a climate issue, a health issue and a transportation issue, and bike lanes can help all three of those.

Rational thinkers understand that the gridlock caused by the bike lanes will cause more pollution than is saved. And that the majority of the very rare cyclist deaths occur in “protected” bike lanes. These things are neither green nor safe.

So what about the gridlock caused when the curb lanes are for parked cars and there is no where safe for bikes as the Mayor is now implementing on Connecticut Avenue?

There aren't enough bicyclists for that to make one ioata of difference. Removing the rush hour restrictions on parking will add gridlock though.

Right, so you are concerned about the gridlock cause by bike lanes but not concerned about gridlock caused by parking lanes.

It's the same gridlock. I think that it's a bad idea to remove the rush hour parking restrictions.

The parking plan causes almost all the same gridlock problems. But at least it serves more people and helps businesses while costing less.

It serves the handful of cars that will be parked there, mostly for free in the unzoned areas. That doesn't help businesses.

And, the DDOT plan all along if you had been paying attention, was a road diet, to slow down the cars. So instead of 5 lands for cars and one lane for bikes, the DDOT plan is 6 lanes for cars, for of them for driving and two of them for parking.

The rush hour parking restrictions will be gone. The Ward 4/MD activists wants more parking and the mayor listened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like a spectacularly bad idea for people on bikes to *try* to piss off people in cars. They're going to cross the wrong person, and end up with a SUV parked on their chest.

Which is, once again, the reason we advocate so fiercely for dedicated bike lanes

Your game plan to get more bike lanes is to piss off drivers so much they want to run you over? Good luck with that. Pretty sure that's the worst advocacy campaign I've ever heard of.

To the contrary, I think it is brilliant. For the strategy simply adopts that which has worked so well for drivers. That is, when they routinely clog the roads with their vehicles (often single occupied) to the point of causing gridlock, drivers are often rewarded with extra lanes. No one can reasonably blame the cyclists for venturing that, by clogging the streets with their bicycles, our transportation officials might react in the usual manner and give them a lane or two of their own.

Wpw. Cars using roads designed for car use. How dare they???

Connecticut Avenue was designed for a fixed rail streetcar, not the automobile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 Dems head (and ex-ANC chair) Bo Finley is tweeting “f—- you” to bike lane skeptics. What is it about the ANC flicking off their constituents?

They're all pissed that their scheme to sneak this through during the pandemic was discovered and that their lies about overwhelming neighborhood knowledge and support were exposed.

For the nth time a disconnect has been shown between their rhetoric and their actions.

Are are over 50 public meetings, all available during and post COVID on zoom, "sneaking through?"

It is a far, far cry from the actual sneaking through that took place in the decades before when meetings were only in person at really inconvenient times for working people and parents of small kids that the ANC and CPCA routinely had. The meetings around this effort were attended by hundreds of people at a time - far more than would ever have participated in regular in-person pre-COVID ANC meetings.

Hardly undemocratic.

"Reversible Lane Study"

+1. Even the DDOT witness last week was amazed at how this somehow became primarily a bike lane project.

You mean the interim director who just came on to the scene? There are about a thousand improvements vetted under this plan, the bike lanes were one of them, but the people opposed to bike lanes will have managed to kill the whole project by the time the dust settles, because bike lanes are integral to Vision Zero, to the DC Sustainability Plan, the Net Zero plans, the clean air plans and the MoveDC plans. But hey, we need more parking so that will supercede everything else, right?

It was only the "Save Connecticut Avenue" people who made it about bike lanes.

“The inception of the project was a safety project, it has always been a safety project. . . and somehow over the years, it kind of morphed into a bike project” Doh!

Know how many cyclists died on that corridor between 1971 and 2014?? 1. And it was in 1971 and because he ran a red light. Not sure if there any more since then. But if so, it's a tiny number.

Because it is ridiculously dangerous for the average person to try to bike, so they drive instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That was an awesome way to see two wheels up and down CT ave. Proof that roads can be used by multiple modalities.

How many stop signs and red lights did they blow through?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weed stores are not even in to be out.
The police have not been defunded.

Normal thinking is understanding we have a climate issue, a health issue and a transportation issue, and bike lanes can help all three of those.

Rational thinkers understand that the gridlock caused by the bike lanes will cause more pollution than is saved. And that the majority of the very rare cyclist deaths occur in “protected” bike lanes. These things are neither green nor safe.

So what about the gridlock caused when the curb lanes are for parked cars and there is no where safe for bikes as the Mayor is now implementing on Connecticut Avenue?

There aren't enough bicyclists for that to make one ioata of difference. Removing the rush hour restrictions on parking will add gridlock though.

Right, so you are concerned about the gridlock cause by bike lanes but not concerned about gridlock caused by parking lanes.

It's the same gridlock. I think that it's a bad idea to remove the rush hour parking restrictions.

The parking plan causes almost all the same gridlock problems. But at least it serves more people and helps businesses while costing less.

It serves the handful of cars that will be parked there, mostly for free in the unzoned areas. That doesn't help businesses.

And, the DDOT plan all along if you had been paying attention, was a road diet, to slow down the cars. So instead of 5 lands for cars and one lane for bikes, the DDOT plan is 6 lanes for cars, for of them for driving and two of them for parking.

The rush hour parking restrictions will be gone. The Ward 4/MD activists wants more parking and the mayor listened.

I don’t think you understand that DDOT just saved future bike lanes in DC by removing them from the CT Ave road diet.

The road diet is still a bad plan. However if they would have implemented a road diet using bike lanes that stood empty all the time, there would be swift and furious public resentment against them from the general public.

Call it the “Old Georgetown Rd effect”. There won’t be another new bike lane in Montgomery County for decades now.

You should be grateful that DDOT stepped in and saved you from yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looked like a lot of fun unless you needed to use on of the major arteries in the city to get somewhere

This. They were all over the road and going pretty slow.

And yet, nothing they did was illegal. If you don't want this all the time, support bike lanes.

It was a one-off. There is nothing to worry about because it's not even going to happen again occasionally let alone regularly or even more absurdly all the time. Less than 100 people regularly bike on Connecticut.

100 young, unmarried cyclists who live downtown rode Uptown at night and left trash all over our park. Most of the people who actually live along the corridor were inside helping their kids with homework or at their kid’s baseball games.

It's unfortunate that people on this forum continue to try to blatantly lie. Several of the people interviewed are middle aged with families in upper NW.



https://x.com/dcsafer/status/1780799656554873305?s=46&t=EwM4bfthPj_yHwyhXgwkdw

DC is only 37 percent white, yet that group was almost 100 percent white. They are privileged and out of touch and think the rest of the city should adjust to them.

What percent of the Connecticut Avenue corridor is white?

Have you been to Connecticut Avenue recently?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

Here's a tiny sampling:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Just think of how many cars these projects gets off the road. Think about the pollution that isn't being spewed into the air, think about the health benefits for the people using these facilities and the emergency room and doctor care not being utilized - so that people who need to drive and park, can, so that people who need medical car have easier access to it.

I don't know what the $39.5 for pedestrian/bike bridges are for, the K Street has to be remade and most of that money is to facilitate the eventual expansion of the streetcar to downtown DC.

The $1.3 million for cleaning bike lanes is actually to both manage trails, clean bike lanes and teach DCPS kids how to ride bikes.

The emergency rooms will be empty because the ambulance couldn’t get there in time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

Here's a tiny sampling:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

There's $52 million to build a separate bridge to Virginia next to one that already is there, but this one would just be for bicyclists. $52 MILLION! This is something WABA has been pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

Here's a tiny sampling:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Just think of how many cars these projects gets off the road. Think about the pollution that isn't being spewed into the air, think about the health benefits for the people using these facilities and the emergency room and doctor care not being utilized - so that people who need to drive and park, can, so that people who need medical car have easier access to it.

I don't know what the $39.5 for pedestrian/bike bridges are for, the K Street has to be remade and most of that money is to facilitate the eventual expansion of the streetcar to downtown DC.

The $1.3 million for cleaning bike lanes is actually to both manage trails, clean bike lanes and teach DCPS kids how to ride bikes.

The number of cars these projects will get off the road is zero. Surveys show bicycling, if anything, is becoming *less* popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was an awesome way to see two wheels up and down CT ave. Proof that roads can be used by multiple modalities.

How many stop signs and red lights did they blow through?

Zero.

And there aren't any stop signs on Connecticut Avenue.