Will DC resume commuter traffic patterns in the fall?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, there's more than one way traffic can get worse, isn't there? One is obviously is you increase the number of cars. The other is if you decreases the capacity of streets to accommodate traffic. The latter is what happens when you add bike lanes -- you reduce the amount of car traffic the road can handle. You can end up with worse traffic even if the total number of cars has declined.

But the purpose of the transportation system isn't to move cars. It's to move people.

Most people in DC drive (and remember: most commuters in DC actually live in Maryland or Virginia).

So, first of all, while it's true that most people in DC drive, it's not true that most people drive for all or even most of their trips.

Second of all, many people in DC do not drive.

And third of all, so what? They drive now, therefore driving must be the transportation priority now and forevermore? Nope.

As for commuters from Maryland and Virginia who are currently driving, if they don't like the driving conditions in DC, then they can adjust their behavior accordingly. DC has no responsibility to operate its transportation system to benefit commuters from Maryland and Virginia over its own residents.[/quote]

Let me guess: You also hate illegal immigrants too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, there's more than one way traffic can get worse, isn't there? One is obviously is you increase the number of cars. The other is if you decreases the capacity of streets to accommodate traffic. The latter is what happens when you add bike lanes -- you reduce the amount of car traffic the road can handle. You can end up with worse traffic even if the total number of cars has declined.

But the purpose of the transportation system isn't to move cars. It's to move people.

Most people in DC drive (and remember: most commuters in DC actually live in Maryland or Virginia).

Most people in MD and VA drive.

Most people in DC don't. A lot do, but not most.

Actually, the majority of DC residents also drive to work. The numbers that take transit and walk are substantially higher than MD or VA though.

Wrong. Only a very slight plurality of Washingtonians used a car to get to work. The share of Washingtonians who take public transit, bike, or walk is rather higher than the share who drive: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&g=0400000US11&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&hidePreview=true

You can't just look at DC-only data, because most commuters in DC are actually from Virginia or Maryland. You get less than half the picture looking at DC-only data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, there's more than one way traffic can get worse, isn't there? One is obviously is you increase the number of cars. The other is if you decreases the capacity of streets to accommodate traffic. The latter is what happens when you add bike lanes -- you reduce the amount of car traffic the road can handle. You can end up with worse traffic even if the total number of cars has declined.

But the purpose of the transportation system isn't to move cars. It's to move people.

Most people in DC drive (and remember: most commuters in DC actually live in Maryland or Virginia).

Most people in MD and VA drive.

Most people in DC don't. A lot do, but not most.

Actually, the majority of DC residents also drive to work. The numbers that take transit and walk are substantially higher than MD or VA though.

Wrong. Only a very slight plurality of Washingtonians used a car to get to work. The share of Washingtonians who take public transit, bike, or walk is rather higher than the share who drive: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&g=0400000US11&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&hidePreview=true

You can't just look at DC-only data, because most commuters in DC are actually from Virginia or Maryland. You get less than half the picture looking at DC-only data.

Yet we pay all of the income taxes and most of the sales taxes to support the roads in our city. Why should our quality of life be degraded because you want to get to work 2 minutes faster?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, there's more than one way traffic can get worse, isn't there? One is obviously is you increase the number of cars. The other is if you decreases the capacity of streets to accommodate traffic. The latter is what happens when you add bike lanes -- you reduce the amount of car traffic the road can handle. You can end up with worse traffic even if the total number of cars has declined.

But the purpose of the transportation system isn't to move cars. It's to move people.

Most people in DC drive (and remember: most commuters in DC actually live in Maryland or Virginia).

Most people in MD and VA drive.

Most people in DC don't. A lot do, but not most.

Actually, the majority of DC residents also drive to work. The numbers that take transit and walk are substantially higher than MD or VA though.

Wrong. Only a very slight plurality of Washingtonians used a car to get to work. The share of Washingtonians who take public transit, bike, or walk is rather higher than the share who drive: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&g=0400000US11&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&hidePreview=true

You can't just look at DC-only data, because most commuters in DC are actually from Virginia or Maryland. You get less than half the picture looking at DC-only data.

And yet you (or a PP with a similar mindset) made the claim that the majority of DC residents drive to work. Now you're moving the goalposts. Can anyone against bike lanes make an intellectually honest argument?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, there's more than one way traffic can get worse, isn't there? One is obviously is you increase the number of cars. The other is if you decreases the capacity of streets to accommodate traffic. The latter is what happens when you add bike lanes -- you reduce the amount of car traffic the road can handle. You can end up with worse traffic even if the total number of cars has declined.

But the purpose of the transportation system isn't to move cars. It's to move people.

Most people in DC drive (and remember: most commuters in DC actually live in Maryland or Virginia).

Most people in MD and VA drive.

Most people in DC don't. A lot do, but not most.

Actually, the majority of DC residents also drive to work. The numbers that take transit and walk are substantially higher than MD or VA though.

Wrong. Only a very slight plurality of Washingtonians used a car to get to work. The share of Washingtonians who take public transit, bike, or walk is rather higher than the share who drive: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&g=0400000US11&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&hidePreview=true

You can't just look at DC-only data, because most commuters in DC are actually from Virginia or Maryland. You get less than half the picture looking at DC-only data.

Yet we pay all of the income taxes and most of the sales taxes to support the roads in our city. Why should our quality of life be degraded because you want to get to work 2 minutes faster?

Why should our quality of life be degraded (and our kids’ safety jeopardized) when substantial commuter traffic is diverted from Connecticut Avenue into the narrower neighborhood streets?!

[Anonymous]

There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

If drivers are not able to navigate side streets safely, why should they be allowed to drive on a street with many more pedestrians to potentially kill? Let's just ban cars everywhere if they're that profoundly unsafe for everyone to be around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

How is noting that it is unsafe for cyclists, for example a kid wanting to bike to their elementary school, making your case about how people are driving on residential streets?

[Anonymous]

There also needs to be a much greater effort to increase mass transit into and within DC. Our metro and bus grid is pretty pathetic, and transit times using WMATA are frankly outrageous. We must give drivers a good alternative to their shitty cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

If drivers are not able to navigate side streets safely, why should they be allowed to drive on a street with many more pedestrians to potentially kill? Let's just ban cars everywhere if they're that profoundly unsafe for everyone to be around.

Not sure what's your point. Are you saying that it's preferable to divert traffic from a major arterial like Connecticut Avenue, which has been engineered and constructed as an arterial road, and instead squeeze commuter traffic down side streets like Macomb and Ordway? Those are much narrower streets, each with one or more schools alongside, where sidewalks hug the street and kids ride bikes in the roadway. We At a recent ANC meeting led by the chair who lives in Maryland, he and several of his buddies seemed to mock concerns expressed about the safety of kids at John Eaton from increased traffic diverted from Conn. Ave to 34th St. It seems that you just want your bike lanes now, and safety and quality of life for everyone else, be damned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

It actually has an additional impact. If DDOT eliminates the reversible lane (and there may be some safety justification for that) AND then further reduces capacity by changing traffic lanes to bike lanes, then the rush hour capacity of Connecticut Avenue will be reduced from 4 lanes to 2 lanes (assuming that no delivery trucks are blocking one of the two remaining lanes). That's a 50 percent capacity reduction, which you can't just assume has no impact. Traffic will divert to parallel routes like 34th Street and will Waze-navigate through narrow cross streets to find a way around jammed up Connecticut Ave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is already commuter traffic on narrower side streets.

And there are already cyclist who bike on Connecticut.

Not safely.

And understand, the removal of the reversible lanes impact the traffic. That decision has been made. The decision to add, or not, bike lanes, has no additional impact on car traffic. That decision is pending.

You have also now identified the issue with increased traffic on residential streets. Well done.

If drivers are not able to navigate side streets safely, why should they be allowed to drive on a street with many more pedestrians to potentially kill? Let's just ban cars everywhere if they're that profoundly unsafe for everyone to be around.

Not sure what's your point. Are you saying that it's preferable to divert traffic from a major arterial like Connecticut Avenue, which has been engineered and constructed as an arterial road, and instead squeeze commuter traffic down side streets like Macomb and Ordway? Those are much narrower streets, each with one or more schools alongside, where sidewalks hug the street and kids ride bikes in the roadway. We At a recent ANC meeting led by the chair who lives in Maryland, he and several of his buddies seemed to mock concerns expressed about the safety of kids at John Eaton from increased traffic diverted from Conn. Ave to 34th St. It seems that you just want your bike lanes now, and safety and quality of life for everyone else, be damned.

I'm saying that your handwringing and histrionically sighing "won't somebody think of the children???" is disingenuous. People who are opposed to any kind of change whatsoever predictably fall back on that canard. My post illustrates the intellectual bankruptcy of that position.

At this point, there's nothing left to discuss. Study after study has shown that bike lane projects have little impact on traffic and improve safety for other users of the road. If you're unconvinced by the mountain of evidence, it's because you're being willfully obtuse. Have a wonderful day.