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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

You just made this up, because there is zero data to support it. The vast majority of bike rides in DC are either weekday commuting or weekends on the Anacostia River Trail, MBT or Hains Point/Maine Ave/Wharf. This midday trips do not exist and if they did DDOT and everyone else would be touting them from the bike counter data.

Funny. I just took a midday trip across town using the various bike lanes and encountered many other cyclists of various races and genders doing the same thing. I must have imagined it all though because according to you such trips “do not exist”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the fairest idea is to put Option C to a voter referendum in Ward 3 next year?

The decision has been made. The city is moving forward with this, and there is nothing the complaining public can do about it. The voters spoke through the ANCs and Councilmember and Mayor who all supported and moved this decision forward.

And, even if the decision hadn't been made, should we put ever new speed hump and liquor license on a referrendum as well?

We live ins a representative democracy, where we elect leaders to make these decisions. That is what happened here.

ANCs are not elected leaders. It's an unpaod volunteer liason position

[Anonymous]

ANCs are elected -- there are elections ongoing now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe the fairest idea is to put Option C to a voter referendum in Ward 3 next year?

The decision has been made. The city is moving forward with this, and there is nothing the complaining public can do about it. The voters spoke through the ANCs and Councilmember and Mayor who all supported and moved this decision forward.

And, even if the decision hadn't been made, should we put ever new speed hump and liquor license on a referrendum as well?

We live ins a representative democracy, where we elect leaders to make these decisions. That is what happened here.

ANCs are not elected leaders. It's an unpaod volunteer liason position

Prepare to have your mind blown: https://anc.dc.gov/page/anc-elections

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

Perhaps. But traffic in the Washington metropolitan region has returned almost to prepandemic levels, even with many workers still working remotely part of the time. Whether most are commuters is beside the point. There are lots of vehicle trips daily. Pretending that a substantial amount of traffic pushed off of Connecticut Ave onto other streets will magically switch to bikes or simply vanish is not tenable.

You are missing the point. The roads have had the same capacity inside the beltway for decades. The growth of the region means magnitudes more cars and traffic. Much of that ends up inside the beltway. We cannot expand our roads, so we have to do something different. As you indicated, Connecticut Avenue is already clogged up. If we don't do something different, then nothing changes or gets better. You seem to be in the 'do nothing' camp.

That is not sustainable and does nothing to help move more people on our public spaces more efficiently.

Really, if we were going to do this right, we would just eliminate ALL parking on CT Ave and just have quick drop off and pick-up zones, a streetcar, bike lanes, a bus lane and a car/uber/cab lane, but that will not happen in our lifetimes.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

Perhaps. But traffic in the Washington metropolitan region has returned almost to prepandemic levels, even with many workers still working remotely part of the time. Whether most are commuters is beside the point. There are lots of vehicle trips daily. Pretending that a substantial amount of traffic pushed off of Connecticut Ave onto other streets will magically switch to bikes or simply vanish is not tenable.

We know from decades of research that, absent monetary or temporal taxation, the volume of traffic will expand to the carrying capacity of the road before drivers switch to other modes. Pretending that retaining the status quo is going to protect the side streets or secondary arteries from increased traffic flows represents a lack of understanding of how traffic works.

The choice is not as you present it between traffic spilling over and traffic not spilling over. It's between providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes or not providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes.

There is no evidence that existing drivers in large numbers ever switch to other modes. What happens instead is that economic activity shifts, either to edge cities or to other regions without hangups about roads.

We could cite a whole litany of evidence and cases to show how how wrong you are, but what is the point? You'll just ignore the post, wait a couple of pages, and then start repeating the same nonsense again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

I’m telling them that a senior citizens or disabled persons right to be dropped off curbside in from of their building is more important than for someone to ride a bike when there are existing transit alternatives.

Given how parked up Connecticut Avenue is now, how are senior citizens and disabled people being dropped off curbside currently? Why do you assume that status quo on that front would change?

(hint...it won't)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

I’m telling them that a senior citizens or disabled persons right to be dropped off curbside in from of their building is more important than for someone to ride a bike when there are existing transit alternatives.

Yes I’m sure you’re a long-time disabilities rights activist, and not just seizing upon yet a another bad-faith argument. Somehow people got dropped off successfully before when there were cars parked in front of the building, so I don’t think having to cross a bike lane is insurmountable.

Hey as long as it's not insurmountable! Apparently the convenience of a small number of Bernie Bros trumps the convenience of anyone and everyone else.

You have it backwards, we are bending over accommodating cars, the most inefficient form of transportation in the history of mankind. And so now, we have AARP and WABA fighting over scraps while AAA laughs at both side from the sideline. It's kind of the way the billionaires have convinced the lower middle class white folks that the poor Latino immigrants are the enemy.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

You just made this up, because there is zero data to support it. The vast majority of bike rides in DC are either weekday commuting or weekends on the Anacostia River Trail, MBT or Hains Point/Maine Ave/Wharf. This midday trips do not exist and if they did DDOT and everyone else would be touting them from the bike counter data.

You clearly either don't get out much or are not very observant.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

Perhaps. But traffic in the Washington metropolitan region has returned almost to prepandemic levels, even with many workers still working remotely part of the time. Whether most are commuters is beside the point. There are lots of vehicle trips daily. Pretending that a substantial amount of traffic pushed off of Connecticut Ave onto other streets will magically switch to bikes or simply vanish is not tenable.

We know from decades of research that, absent monetary or temporal taxation, the volume of traffic will expand to the carrying capacity of the road before drivers switch to other modes. Pretending that retaining the status quo is going to protect the side streets or secondary arteries from increased traffic flows represents a lack of understanding of how traffic works.

The choice is not as you present it between traffic spilling over and traffic not spilling over. It's between providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes or not providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes.

There is no evidence that existing drivers in large numbers ever switch to other modes. What happens instead is that economic activity shifts, either to edge cities or to other regions without hangups about roads.

Yes, let's all praise the high quality of life in the exurban paradise of auto-centric Loudoun and Prince William Counties.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

I agree with the idea to develop more transit. The challenge, however, is what type of transit to go with. You're not going to lure more commuters from that area with buses. Buses remain stigmatized for better or for worse. Trackless trolleys or light rail, while more expensive, might prove to be more attractive.

Bring back the Connecticut Avenue Streetcar! The turnaround at Chevy Chase is still there. Make it happen!

Light rail or BRT on Wisconsin would be genius, linking all the new development up by Tenleytown with Dupont Circle and Georgetown. That would benefit so many neighborhoods, commuters, and businesses, and it would unlock even more development in that area. Light rail can also really enhance a neighborhood’s charm when implemented well. WMATA already has a bus facility at the north end that could do double duty as a light rail facility.

Connecticut is a tougher sell for light rail, because it already has the Red Line. BRT or just faster and more frequent buses would still make lots of sense.

I agree with PPs that I’d much rather the ANC and the city spend time on these promising directions than bickering over bike lanes.

Oh yeah, installing a new light rail system with a terminus in a wealthy residential neighborhood definitely won't stir up any political controversy at all.

The suggestion is to use WMATA’s existing Western Bus Division facility, which is located on Wisconsin right near the Tenleytown Metro stop. And if siting a stop on Dupont is difficult (I don’t think it would be), there is actually already an unused streetcar tunnel underneath.

Yeah, I'm aware of where the facility is. I'm saying, if you think discussions of bike lanes are too divisive, or bike lanes too disruptive or expensive, a new light-rail system will be even worse. You think the people who live near the bus depot won't object at all to turning it into a new form of public transit terminal? You think streetcars won't mess up traffic flow or require extensive reconstruction on major roads?

The politics surrounding building out the streetcar network are indeed toxic. To do it would take a mayor who was willing to stake their political career on it. Bowser has made it very clear that she has no interest in being that mayor. Realistically, the only thing that is likely to happen over the next 10-20 years is an extension of the existing line to the Benning St Metro. That makes me sad but it is what it is.

The streetcar is a boondoggle as implemented. One car parked too far from a curb brings the system to a standstill. And forget about situations involving fire or other emergency response. The DC Circulator is a perfectly suitable and more flexible and cost effective alternative to supplementing Metrobus over shorter distances within our lass than sprawling city.

It’s a boondoggle because it was woefully mismanaged. It didn’t have to be this way.

Exactly. There are countless cities that have made light rail work. The design and execution of the H St line were uniquely atrocious.

Seattle took the right approach here: start with low-cost BRT to prove demand and fine-tune routes, dedicated lanes, priority, etc. Then make the big investment in upgrading to light rail, with the community’s support.

I would so much rather that the ANC spent time on this.

Have you attended an ANC meeting and raised this option?

Our ANC has been taken over by a bunch of know-it-all Smart Growth (Smartie Growth?) ideologues. They seem to listen to no one but their Twitter “likes.”

get over it. Things change in cities, and have been since the beginning of cities. More people want options for transporation now. They also know its a LOT better for the environment. So take a deep breath boomer. Its going to be ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ANCs are elected -- there are elections ongoing now.

A lot of the candidates were recruited and trained by Greater Greater Washington-Smart Growth. They are like Party cadres advancing their party’s Urbanist egenda.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

I agree with the idea to develop more transit. The challenge, however, is what type of transit to go with. You're not going to lure more commuters from that area with buses. Buses remain stigmatized for better or for worse. Trackless trolleys or light rail, while more expensive, might prove to be more attractive.

Bring back the Connecticut Avenue Streetcar! The turnaround at Chevy Chase is still there. Make it happen!

Light rail or BRT on Wisconsin would be genius, linking all the new development up by Tenleytown with Dupont Circle and Georgetown. That would benefit so many neighborhoods, commuters, and businesses, and it would unlock even more development in that area. Light rail can also really enhance a neighborhood’s charm when implemented well. WMATA already has a bus facility at the north end that could do double duty as a light rail facility.

Connecticut is a tougher sell for light rail, because it already has the Red Line. BRT or just faster and more frequent buses would still make lots of sense.

I agree with PPs that I’d much rather the ANC and the city spend time on these promising directions than bickering over bike lanes.

Oh yeah, installing a new light rail system with a terminus in a wealthy residential neighborhood definitely won't stir up any political controversy at all.

The suggestion is to use WMATA’s existing Western Bus Division facility, which is located on Wisconsin right near the Tenleytown Metro stop. And if siting a stop on Dupont is difficult (I don’t think it would be), there is actually already an unused streetcar tunnel underneath.

Yeah, I'm aware of where the facility is. I'm saying, if you think discussions of bike lanes are too divisive, or bike lanes too disruptive or expensive, a new light-rail system will be even worse. You think the people who live near the bus depot won't object at all to turning it into a new form of public transit terminal? You think streetcars won't mess up traffic flow or require extensive reconstruction on major roads?

The politics surrounding building out the streetcar network are indeed toxic. To do it would take a mayor who was willing to stake their political career on it. Bowser has made it very clear that she has no interest in being that mayor. Realistically, the only thing that is likely to happen over the next 10-20 years is an extension of the existing line to the Benning St Metro. That makes me sad but it is what it is.

The streetcar is a boondoggle as implemented. One car parked too far from a curb brings the system to a standstill. And forget about situations involving fire or other emergency response. The DC Circulator is a perfectly suitable and more flexible and cost effective alternative to supplementing Metrobus over shorter distances within our lass than sprawling city.

It’s a boondoggle because it was woefully mismanaged. It didn’t have to be this way.

Exactly. There are countless cities that have made light rail work. The design and execution of the H St line were uniquely atrocious.

Seattle took the right approach here: start with low-cost BRT to prove demand and fine-tune routes, dedicated lanes, priority, etc. Then make the big investment in upgrading to light rail, with the community’s support.

I would so much rather that the ANC spent time on this.

ANCs in Ward 7 have supported the extension of the Streetcar to the Benning St Metro stop. Extending the existing Streetcar line - let alone building an entirely new one - literally does cost billions. It's not something that can be done with the full support of the Mayor and the Council and significant federal funding. A single ANC advocating for a new Streetcar line in the absence of any higher-level political support is almost certainly a complete waste of time. ANCs spend their time debating a lot of silly things that fall well beyond their mandate, but this isn't something that the general public should encourage.

This is patently false. The H Street streetcar cost $200 million, and that was for a mismanaged and decade delayed project. Advocating for improved non-rail transit, especially BRT in advance of light rail, is well within the scope of an ANC.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

Perhaps. But traffic in the Washington metropolitan region has returned almost to prepandemic levels, even with many workers still working remotely part of the time. Whether most are commuters is beside the point. There are lots of vehicle trips daily. Pretending that a substantial amount of traffic pushed off of Connecticut Ave onto other streets will magically switch to bikes or simply vanish is not tenable.

We know from decades of research that, absent monetary or temporal taxation, the volume of traffic will expand to the carrying capacity of the road before drivers switch to other modes. Pretending that retaining the status quo is going to protect the side streets or secondary arteries from increased traffic flows represents a lack of understanding of how traffic works.

The choice is not as you present it between traffic spilling over and traffic not spilling over. It's between providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes or not providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes.

There is no evidence that existing drivers in large numbers ever switch to other modes. What happens instead is that economic activity shifts, either to edge cities or to other regions without hangups about roads.

I don't get. So Washington, DC should in fact aspire to become more like Tyson's Corner?

You may not be aware, but much of Wards 3, 1, and 5 came very close to being bulldozed in favor of an Inner Beltway that would have connected to the Whitehurst Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway. Maybe you would have liked that city more, but not me.

More than enough damage was done by the demolition of black neighborhoods to create 395, 695, and 295, roads which are predominantly used by vehicles that pass through the city.

[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:A constructive counterproposal, which I haven't seen anyone advance yet, would be radically improving bus service on Connecticut and Wisconsin. It could be so much better than it is right now, especially for commuters. If the goal is to get people out of cars in Ward 3, I could see that getting buy-in from both sides of the Connecticut tussle.

In other words, if we don't agree on shifting toward biking infrastructure, but we do agree on shifting toward bus infrastructure, why don't we start by accomplishing that?

I think you are the voice of reason and I hope we end up here. I think neighbors can all agree that traffic calming (HAWKS, speed cameras, and actual enforcement) is necessary on Connecticut and improved bus/transit service would be great. We can probably agree on 80% of improvements, yet we are spending 100% of our time arguing about the bike lanes which is clearly a divisive issue. We need to find the common ground and start there.

Sure, but for people who want to bike, what you are telling them that your ability to get somewhere 25 seconds faster in a car is more important than their ability to have a safe space to ride.

Yes, exactly. It’s an ugly truth, but as long as vehicle occupants vastly outnumber bicyclists and traffic is congested, most drivers would like to discourage bicyclists from being on the road. Planners are creating bike lanes anyway because we should be encouraging bicycling, but people who do not and will not ride bikes don’t want that.

People don't want to bike. Look at the numbers. The number of people riding bikes in this city is pathetically small. People have voted with their feet. Transportation resources should be used to move people around as efficiently as possible, not because people want to make a political statement about bikes.

People aren't biking on CT Ave because it is unsafe. Make it safe, and more people will.

And I agree, transportation resources should be dedicated to efficient movement. Single occupancy cars is the LEAST efficient way to move people around. So how about we just ban single occupancy cars and have everyone bus and bike? Problem solved, right?

We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years. If biking was going to become popular, it would have by now. If anything, it's becoming less popular. I'm sorry but people simply aren't interested for a long list of reasons.

False. Again.

I have posted this multiple times in this thread, but here we go again. Biking in core DC has grown considerably since 2007 when DC started focusing on bike infrastructure. It's likely even higher now (this data was from 2017): https://ggwash.org/view/80233/the-bike-boom-is-real-says-new-mode-share-data-regional-travel-survey

we dont have to rely on such old data (especially since the pandemic scrambled the numbers). here's what the census said about commuting in dc in 2021:

drive -- 29 percent
public transportation -- 11.6 percent
walk -- 6.7 percent
cab, motorcycle, other -- 2.6 percent
bike -- 2.1 percent
work from home -- 48 percent

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Washington%20city,%20District%20of%20Columbia&t=Commuting&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0801

So about 4% of DC residents who actually went into work commuted by bike. This is a quadrupling of the proportion in 2007-08 and a 60 percent increase over 2017-18. Name any other mode of transport that has that rate of increase.

Of course, bike lanes aren’t just for bikes, but for scooters, one-wheels, and personal mobility devices - including electric wheelchairs. If you want to tell us that these have not also increased in popularity, go ahead but be forewarned that you will being telling us a lot more about yourself than about the subject you are opining on.

And before you say that 4% is a tiny number, I beg you to calculate the proportion of road space and the city’s transportation budget that are dedicated to bikes and other personal mobility devices. I think you’ll find that both numbers are a good order of magnitude less than 4%.

There are also many people who are working from home and are finding it easier to have meetings or run errands on bike during breaks in the work day. Guess what. They ride bikes. This isn't JUST about commuting downtown.

Perhaps. But traffic in the Washington metropolitan region has returned almost to prepandemic levels, even with many workers still working remotely part of the time. Whether most are commuters is beside the point. There are lots of vehicle trips daily. Pretending that a substantial amount of traffic pushed off of Connecticut Ave onto other streets will magically switch to bikes or simply vanish is not tenable.

We know from decades of research that, absent monetary or temporal taxation, the volume of traffic will expand to the carrying capacity of the road before drivers switch to other modes. Pretending that retaining the status quo is going to protect the side streets or secondary arteries from increased traffic flows represents a lack of understanding of how traffic works.

The choice is not as you present it between traffic spilling over and traffic not spilling over. It's between providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes or not providing a safe and comfortable means for people to commute via non-vehicular modes.

There is no evidence that existing drivers in large numbers ever switch to other modes. What happens instead is that economic activity shifts, either to edge cities or to other regions without hangups about roads.

I don't get. So Washington, DC should in fact aspire to become more like Tyson's Corner?

You may not be aware, but much of Wards 3, 1, and 5 came very close to being bulldozed in favor of an Inner Beltway that would have connected to the Whitehurst Freeway and the Anacostia Freeway. Maybe you would have liked that city more, but not me.

More than enough damage was done by the demolition of black neighborhoods to create 395, 695, and 295, roads which are predominantly used by vehicles that pass through the city.

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this plan