Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

Huh? No one who has lived in this city for longer than the past decade needs to "imagine" anything of the sort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

If only we would add more lanes, the city would be so much nicer. Just look at LA. They keep adding lanes and, while traffic has not gotten better - maybe worse, I am *sure* it'll get better if they just add a few more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

So would people who own four cars for their own use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

So would people who own four cars for their own use.

Perhaps the only group in Washington D.C. that's smaller than bicyclists is the number of people who own four cars.

[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:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

If only we would add more lanes, the city would be so much nicer. Just look at LA. They keep adding lanes and, while traffic has not gotten better - maybe worse, I am *sure* it'll get better if they just add a few more.

D.C. is smaller than El Paso.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

They are not a "special interest giveaway" if the benefits they create can be experienced by almost the entire population - that is anyone who knows how to ride a bike, scooter, or any form of personal mobility device. They are also not a "special interest giveaway" if building them helps improve the quality of life for the general population, which they do by reducing pollution, injuries and death, obesity, and so on.

[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:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

They are not a "special interest giveaway" if the benefits they create can be experienced by almost the entire population - that is anyone who knows how to ride a bike, scooter, or any form of personal mobility device. They are also not a "special interest giveaway" if building them helps improve the quality of life for the general population, which they do by reducing pollution, injuries and death, obesity, and so on.

What if we created special lanes for people who only want to travel on stilts? Would you say that benefits the entire population? Would you say that reduces pollution and obesity? Would you say that reduces injuries and deaths? Would you say that is improving the qualify of life in the city?

No, you wouldn't. You call that an absurd special interest giveaway.

Same deal with bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

So would people who own four cars for their own use.

Perhaps the only group in Washington D.C. that's smaller than bicyclists is the number of people who own four cars.

+1 Exactly.

[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:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

They are not a "special interest giveaway" if the benefits they create can be experienced by almost the entire population - that is anyone who knows how to ride a bike, scooter, or any form of personal mobility device. They are also not a "special interest giveaway" if building them helps improve the quality of life for the general population, which they do by reducing pollution, injuries and death, obesity, and so on.

What if we created special lanes for people who only want to travel on stilts? Would you say that benefits the entire population? Would you say that reduces pollution and obesity? Would you say that reduces injuries and deaths? Would you say that is improving the qualify of life in the city?

No, you wouldn't. You call that an absurd special interest giveaway.

Same deal with bike lanes.

I understand you're just picking an absurd example, but: People can travel on stilts on the sidewalk safely, though. I suspect you wouldn't be all that happy if everyone who rides a bike in D.C. rode on the sidewalk, even if they only did it in the areas where it's currently legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

So would people who own four cars for their own use.

Perhaps the only group in Washington D.C. that's smaller than bicyclists is the number of people who own four cars.

+1 Exactly.

And so what if a single person owns 5 cars? Can they drive all 5 at the same time? No. Are they somehow polluting more if the have 5 cars or crowding the streets more? No.

[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:Maybe not infinite, but you can see how a lot of people don't have cars either by finances or choice. On the other hand, there is a lot of room to grow in terms of housing.

Doesn't it make sense as housing options are expanded, to ensure people who live here can get what they need without a car?

Also, doesn't Amazon and the various food delivery services make that easier as well?

There are more cars registered with the city than there are households.

Yes, but 35 percent of households don't have any cars.

My single neighbor has at least 5.

Ha, I think you are talking about me. Divorced woman with 4 cars , 2 short blocks from Conn Ave.

What can I say, I love classic cars ....


And for the record, I predict that the bottleneck bike lanes get removed within 2 years when the area between the Circle and the Zoo becomes an unmitigated clusterfuk.

Exactly like the idiotic project to narrow Wisconsin to a single travel lane a few years ago, in Glover Park

Thanks for painting a very vivid image of the kind of people who are opposing measures to improve the safety of cyclists in DC.

Cyclists would be wise to understand two realities:
1) You’re a small group of people in a much larger city.
2) The world doesn’t revolve around you.

Do you ever consider what a better city / world we would live in if it didn't revolve around cars? If not, you should.

Have you considered what a better city we would live in if we got rid of all the bike lanes? If not, you should.

The bike lanes that have been installed improve the quality of life immeasurably for those who use them and, by taking cars off the road, for drivers as well.

If you are able to do so, you really should invest in a bike and, if need be, some bike riding lessons. I think you would find that a ride on a protected bike lane on a morning such as this would put you in a much better mood.

I'd rather the city focus on easing traffic congestion. That would provide the most benefit to the most people. Bike lanes are just a special interest giveaway. No one uses them except a tiny group of bicycling enthusiasts.

If only we would add more lanes, the city would be so much nicer. Just look at LA. They keep adding lanes and, while traffic has not gotten better - maybe worse, I am *sure* it'll get better if they just add a few more.

C'mon bro. Just a few more lanes bro. We need to ease traffic congestion. One or two more lanes ought to do it.

[Anonymous]

It is just so odd that some people think that intentionally creating more congestion is a good idea.