Alexandria Bike Lobby wins again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You think poor people don’t bike?? You really do have your head up your rear.

You aren’t helping your pro bike lane position. At all.

PP, if you would have supported bike infrastructure, except somebody said something mean to you on an anonymous Internet message board - well, then you probably weren't much of a supporter of bike infrastructure.

The reality is that poor people bike. Bikes are a cheap way for people to get around without having to depend on buses that may run infrequently, or not show up at all, or not run early enough, or not run late enough, or not go where they're going.

If you're interested, you can look up the Monument Street bike lane controversy in Baltimore.

Or you can read this piece, which is by now almost 15 years old but still relevant: https://www.bicycling.com/news/a20049826/how-low-income-cyclists-go-unnoticed/

Or you can just open your eyes and look around. See that person biking on the sidewalk? See that bike locked to a sign? That's not a middle-aged white male on a $10,000 bike. That's a low-income worker commuting to a job.

You don’t get it. I have spent my entire career working with low income and vulnerable populations in their daily lives and you’re so ignorant and out of touch. You just think it makes sense for poor people to all hike, bye cause you’re so smart and see a few people you assume are low wage workers biking. But do you actually know? The large majority of low income people do not have access to a bike, or money to buy one, a helmet and gear (like a lock or lints). Sure a handful may be able to get a cheap one at a thrift store if they can get there. But this is not anywhere near the norm. Many actually don’t even know how to ride a bike, just like many don’t even know how to swim. They can’t afford regular every day stuff, like diapers, tampons, fresh food, insurance. Things these bike vigilantes take for granted. It doesn’t even occur to you that someone might need a job that is just too far away to bike, and it’s the only job they can get. They have zero free time or luxury to worry about bike lanes and road diets, because they’re just trying to keep their head above water.

If you've spent your entire career working with low-income people, then you should know that low-income people bike. If you don't know that, then I don't know what to tell you. Do all low-income people bike everywhere? No, of course not. But low-income people bike. (Typically, without a helmet.) And low-income people get killed while biking. You should know that too.

By the way, if low-income people can't afford a bike, then they sure as heck can't afford a car.

All the data I’ve seen shows that low income people bike. In fact, there’s a higher percentage of low income people who bike than high income people who bike.

https://www.vox.com/2014/7/9/5883823/its-not-just-hipsters-on-bikes-cycling-is-most-popular-for-poor-people

Show me your data that contradicts this.

Well if low income people get hit biking, let's focus ALX funds on complete street features near those low income areas, not million dollar homes.

How about a slight variation. Build bike (and pedestrian) infrastructure to benefit low income people most. Maybe that means building it near their homes, but maybe also connecting their homes to job opportunities, amenities, etc.

To improve the environment, more people of all incomes should have opportunities to bike, not just rich people.

How about acknowledging that lots of low income people here are here illegally and don’t deserve one penny of our tax dollars, never mind employment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m also supposed to give pedestrians the right of way by law, but I told my kids that even though they legally HAVE the right of way, don’t assume it’s safe to do so all the time. If you walk behind a ton of steel that’s backing up, you might have the right of way, but you might also be killed. Which is more important to you?

PP#1: It's not legal for people on bikes to do this.
PP#2: That's wrong, it actually is legal.
You: Just cuz it's legal doesn't mean it's safe.

Yes, it's true that it may be legal but it may also be dangerous because the drivers aren't obeying the law.

But then don't talk to me about scofflaw cyclists. The danger is from scofflaw drivers (or drivers who don't even know the law).

It's not really smart law, now is it? Tons of steel against a bike? Seems to me that any smart biker might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can get them killed?

If the driver is disobeying the law, then it's not "a bicyclist behaving in a manner that can get them killed," it's "a driver killing a bicyclist." Seems to me that any smart driver might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can kill people.

So the biker has no personal responsibility? Does that helmet cut off common sense?

It's the driver's personal AND LEGAL responsibility to exercise due care in order to not kill people.

If there's a meaningful fraction of drivers who don't want to, or can't, do that - then that's all the more reason why we need protected bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m also supposed to give pedestrians the right of way by law, but I told my kids that even though they legally HAVE the right of way, don’t assume it’s safe to do so all the time. If you walk behind a ton of steel that’s backing up, you might have the right of way, but you might also be killed. Which is more important to you?

PP#1: It's not legal for people on bikes to do this.
PP#2: That's wrong, it actually is legal.
You: Just cuz it's legal doesn't mean it's safe.

Yes, it's true that it may be legal but it may also be dangerous because the drivers aren't obeying the law.

But then don't talk to me about scofflaw cyclists. The danger is from scofflaw drivers (or drivers who don't even know the law).

It's not really smart law, now is it? Tons of steel against a bike? Seems to me that any smart biker might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can get them killed?

If the driver is disobeying the law, then it's not "a bicyclist behaving in a manner that can get them killed," it's "a driver killing a bicyclist." Seems to me that any smart driver might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can kill people.

So the biker has no personal responsibility? Does that helmet cut off common sense?

It's the driver's personal AND LEGAL responsibility to exercise due care in order to not kill people.

If there's a meaningful fraction of drivers who don't want to, or can't, do that - then that's all the more reason why we need protected bike lanes.

This attitude by drivers is exactly why traffic calming, protected bike lanes, stop signs, etc are needed. If drivers won't stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk who have the right of way then a stop sign should be installed there. If drivers won't give bikers sharing the lane a wide berth, then a protected bike lane should be put in. If a pedestrian has trouble crossing because parked cars block the visor of drivers, then curb cuts should be installed. All of this results in loss of parking, loss of lanes and lowered speeds for drivers because GUESS WHAT, drivers can't be trusted to acknowledge and make room for other users. So don't have this attitude of "well I am not legally right but I can kill you so you can get out of my way" and then complain when you lose lanes and parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not the PP but I have personally talked to hundreds of people about this project. A vast majority, especially those in Central Alexandria, didn’t want it. I guess we will find out next election cycle.

But regardless of what a vast majority of the citizens want, I have personally heard the mayor state that he was going to vote the way he was going to vote regardless of the will of the majority. His exact words were “I won’t do something stupid even if the majority of citizens want me to.” The Mayor of Alexandria believes that he can substitute his will for the will of the people in our city. That’s not leadership. And neither is saying “we can’t do this again” when talking about a process that involves civic engagement simply because city staff mismanaged the process.

Well, yes. Do you want your elected representatives to do stupid things if a majority of voters want them to? I don't.

The will of the people is expressed when they vote for the mayor. It's not government by referendum.

I don't want my elected representatives substituting their personal beliefs about what is stupid over the recommendations of city boards or staff in a city manger style government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m also supposed to give pedestrians the right of way by law, but I told my kids that even though they legally HAVE the right of way, don’t assume it’s safe to do so all the time. If you walk behind a ton of steel that’s backing up, you might have the right of way, but you might also be killed. Which is more important to you?

PP#1: It's not legal for people on bikes to do this.
PP#2: That's wrong, it actually is legal.
You: Just cuz it's legal doesn't mean it's safe.

Yes, it's true that it may be legal but it may also be dangerous because the drivers aren't obeying the law.

But then don't talk to me about scofflaw cyclists. The danger is from scofflaw drivers (or drivers who don't even know the law).

It's not really smart law, now is it? Tons of steel against a bike? Seems to me that any smart biker might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can get them killed?

If the driver is disobeying the law, then it's not "a bicyclist behaving in a manner that can get them killed," it's "a driver killing a bicyclist." Seems to me that any smart driver might understand this and stop behaving in a manner that can kill people.

So the biker has no personal responsibility? Does that helmet cut off common sense?

It's the driver's personal AND LEGAL responsibility to exercise due care in order to not kill people.

If there's a meaningful fraction of drivers who don't want to, or can't, do that - then that's all the more reason why we need protected bike lanes.

This attitude by drivers is exactly why traffic calming, protected bike lanes, stop signs, etc are needed. If drivers won't stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk who have the right of way then a stop sign should be installed there. If drivers won't give bikers sharing the lane a wide berth, then a protected bike lane should be put in. If a pedestrian has trouble crossing because parked cars block the visor of drivers, then curb cuts should be installed. All of this results in loss of parking, loss of lanes and lowered speeds for drivers because GUESS WHAT, drivers can't be trusted to acknowledge and make room for other users. So don't have this attitude of "well I am not legally right but I can kill you so you can get out of my way" and then complain when you lose lanes and parking.

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not the PP but I have personally talked to hundreds of people about this project. A vast majority, especially those in Central Alexandria, didn’t want it. I guess we will find out next election cycle.

But regardless of what a vast majority of the citizens want, I have personally heard the mayor state that he was going to vote the way he was going to vote regardless of the will of the majority. His exact words were “I won’t do something stupid even if the majority of citizens want me to.” The Mayor of Alexandria believes that he can substitute his will for the will of the people in our city. That’s not leadership. And neither is saying “we can’t do this again” when talking about a process that involves civic engagement simply because city staff mismanaged the process.

Well, yes. Do you want your elected representatives to do stupid things if a majority of voters want them to? I don't.

The will of the people is expressed when they vote for the mayor. It's not government by referendum.

I don't want my elected representatives substituting their personal beliefs about what is stupid over the recommendations of city boards or staff in a city manger style government.

OK, then before you vote for a candidate, ask them whether or not they will do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

If people are pissed, then they need to start advocating. And I don't mean advocating against bike lanes. In an ideal world, you wouldn't have to advocate so that your kids can walk safely to school. But we don't live in an ideal world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

I don't find these things to be inconsistent at all- I live near a street with a bike lane and I feel much safer crossing the portion that has a bike lane than the portion with cars. I would absolutely prefer to leave near a street that had zero cars and only bikes than a car-only street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

If people are pissed, then they need to start advocating. And I don't mean advocating against bike lanes. In an ideal world, you wouldn't have to advocate so that your kids can walk safely to school. But we don't live in an ideal world.

People have been. For 10 years in some cases. You act like changing priorities, policies, and funding streams in simple. I promise you, after year and years of advocacy in this area, it is not simple. And honestly, the idea that people aren't getting this things because they aren't advocating for themselves is really dismissive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

I don't find these things to be inconsistent at all- I live near a street with a bike lane and I feel much safer crossing the portion that has a bike lane than the portion with cars. I would absolutely prefer to leave near a street that had zero cars and only bikes than a car-only street.

I am not really sure what your point is. Not all streets can fit bike lanes. In fact, most cannot. Those areas need and require other forms of traffic calming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:\

People have been. For 10 years in some cases. You act like changing priorities, policies, and funding streams in simple. I promise you, after year and years of advocacy in this area, it is not simple. And honestly, the idea that people aren't getting this things because they aren't advocating for themselves is really dismissive.

No, it's not simple. And yes, it requires an absurd amount of advocacy - ideally not including "You should build sidewalks here INSTEAD OF bike lanes over there." It's not the bike-lane advocates who are preventing you from getting a sidewalk. We need sidewalks AND bike lanes AND different priorities and policies AND more funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, well in Alexandria, we put a higher priority on bike lanes than on traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks and sidewalks. Anyone can look at Alexandria's transportation funding streams to see that. Or just talk to any of the residents who wait years to get crosswalks, stop signs, speed humps, etc., or whose kids walk to school or wait for buses on streets without sidewalks while bike lanes on high ADT arterial roads are given priority and funding. Or ask the city why those residents have to jump through hoops, put together lengthy petitions, and attend hearings to get safety improvements on residential roads where data shows legitimate safety issues while the city does all the leg work to get bike lanes approved on one of the safest streets in Alexandria.

It's high AADT arterial roads that bike lanes are particularly needed on.

But in any case, it shouldn't be bike lanes vs. traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. It should be bike lanes AND traffic calming, stop signs, crosswalks, and sidewalks. All of those things make the roads safer for everybody.

Well I actually agree with you there. But until our city starts treating these things equally and prioritizing traffic calming as much as they prioritize bike lanes, people are going to be pissed. Because honestly, most people care more about their kids walking safely to school, being able to bike in their own neighborhoods, and taking walks without near misses at every crosswalk than they do about bike lanes. I know that isn't fair to cyclists, but that is reality.

I don't find these things to be inconsistent at all- I live near a street with a bike lane and I feel much safer crossing the portion that has a bike lane than the portion with cars. I would absolutely prefer to leave near a street that had zero cars and only bikes than a car-only street.

I am not really sure what your point is. Not all streets can fit bike lanes. In fact, most cannot. Those areas need and require other forms of traffic calming.

Unless a street is a single, narrow lane with no parking then it can fit a bike lane. It requires taking space away from cars, but it can fit a bike lane. Bonus, reducing lanes acts as traffic calming and is safer for pedestrians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am not really sure what your point is. Not all streets can fit bike lanes. In fact, most cannot. Those areas need and require other forms of traffic calming.

What kinds of streets that require traffic calming can't fit bike lanes? Especially since making general-travel lanes narrower is a well-established method for traffic calming.