Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:money should be put into public transportation and HOV requirements during certain times of the day for commuters v.s people driving in their own neighborhood. Those would reduce car traffic.

Bikes, scooters and other dangerous and traffic snarling non-motorized vehicles should be on separate paths/roadways.

Do you want to know what is more traffic snarling than bikes and scooters? Cars.

[Anonymous]

You are not stuck in traffic. You ARE the traffic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The roads are a scarce resource - at any given time on any given block the ratio of non-bikers to other people in vehicles including public transportation or walking is huge - yet so many resources money and space are dedicated to bikes - which seems like a giant waste. It is delusional to think that adding more bike lanes will change that ratio in any material way.

Yes, our public space is scarce. So why not make it so as many people can use it as possible. If one were designing a city from scratch, planning around a single occupancy vehicle wouldn't be on the top 20 list of getting people around efficiently. As such, we should be doing everything we can to maximize mass transit and cleaner forms of mobility like scooters, bikes and eBikes, which are a game changer.

Thanks for making the point.

Bikes and scooters are single occupancy vehicles

They take up a fraction of the space, they seldom cause death when there is a collusion and they don't pollute.

Cars on the other hand...

You literally just claimed we should not cater transportation policy to single occupancy vehicles.

Single occupancy cars. happy now?

You seem to have difficulty understanding what single occupancy means. Single occupancy cars are already banned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The roads are a scarce resource - at any given time on any given block the ratio of non-bikers to other people in vehicles including public transportation or walking is huge - yet so many resources money and space are dedicated to bikes - which seems like a giant waste. It is delusional to think that adding more bike lanes will change that ratio in any material way.

Yes, our public space is scarce. So why not make it so as many people can use it as possible. If one were designing a city from scratch, planning around a single occupancy vehicle wouldn't be on the top 20 list of getting people around efficiently. As such, we should be doing everything we can to maximize mass transit and cleaner forms of mobility like scooters, bikes and eBikes, which are a game changer.

Thanks for making the point.

Bikes and scooters are single occupancy vehicles

They take up a fraction of the space, they seldom cause death when there is a collusion and they don't pollute.

Cars on the other hand...

You literally just claimed we should not cater transportation policy to single occupancy vehicles.

Single occupancy cars. happy now?

You seem to have difficulty understanding what single occupancy means. Single occupancy cars are already banned.

From what?

[Anonymous]

Good luck changing the mayor's mind...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The roads are a scarce resource - at any given time on any given block the ratio of non-bikers to other people in vehicles including public transportation or walking is huge - yet so many resources money and space are dedicated to bikes - which seems like a giant waste. It is delusional to think that adding more bike lanes will change that ratio in any material way.

Yes, our public space is scarce. So why not make it so as many people can use it as possible. If one were designing a city from scratch, planning around a single occupancy vehicle wouldn't be on the top 20 list of getting people around efficiently. As such, we should be doing everything we can to maximize mass transit and cleaner forms of mobility like scooters, bikes and eBikes, which are a game changer.

Thanks for making the point.

Bikes and scooters are single occupancy vehicles

They take up a fraction of the space, they seldom cause death when there is a collusion and they don't pollute.

Cars on the other hand...

You literally just claimed we should not cater transportation policy to single occupancy vehicles.

Single occupancy cars. happy now?

You seem to have difficulty understanding what single occupancy means. Single occupancy cars are already banned.

From what?

Streets around the country. They aren't road legal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be happy if they replaced all the bike lanes with parking spaces. It just seems silly to dedicate so much space to something that hardly anyone uses. We should be using this space in a way that benefits the most people.

So 20 cars per hour can park instead of hundreds of people biking. Got it.

Hundreds of people are not and will not be biking. Please. Most people cannot commute by bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The roads are a scarce resource - at any given time on any given block the ratio of non-bikers to other people in vehicles including public transportation or walking is huge - yet so many resources money and space are dedicated to bikes - which seems like a giant waste. It is delusional to think that adding more bike lanes will change that ratio in any material way.

Except this is exactly what happens when new bike facilities are implemented in public spaces. google it. Facts matter.

Just because YOU wouldn't bike, doesn't mean there aren't scores of others who would.

We've had protected bike lanes in D.C. for almost 15 years. Why are there still so few people here who ride bikes? I mean, it's pathetic how few people use the bike lanes.

Because bikes are completely impractical for the vast majority of people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:money should be put into public transportation and HOV requirements during certain times of the day for commuters v.s people driving in their own neighborhood. Those would reduce car traffic.

Bikes, scooters and other dangerous and traffic snarling non-motorized vehicles should be on separate paths/roadways.

Do you want to know what is more traffic snarling than bikes and scooters? Cars.

It's hard for bikers and people on scooters to snarl traffic because there are so few of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2/4 = 50%

In all practicality, is is 2 through lanes now and will be 2 through lanes in the future.

In all practicality it will be one functional lane in each direction. Because taxis, Ubers, buses, deliveries, etc will all need to stop somewhere and it will just be to stop in the street because there will be no other place.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it will be the death knell for many of the businesses on Connecticut Avenue in Cleveland Park. I haven't eaten at a restaurant there since they closed the service road, because it is now impossible to park after 4 pm. When they take away the rest of the parking, it will also be impossible to patronize the dry cleaners or Yes or any of the other businesses there even during the day, for those of us who are elders, disabled, or otherwise unable to pedal a bike or walk a significant distance with groceries or packages. (Much of Cleveland Park is significantly uphill from the avenue, fwiw.) Meantime, the restaurants and other businesses at Cathedral Commons are thriving, because there is ample parking at any time of day. Bike lines are great in concept, but they definite preference the relatively few and able-bodied.

1) studies show businesses benefit from bike lanes, not suffer, so your supposition is anecdotal at best and
2) if you already don't go to Cleveland Park, then the addition of bike lanes won't impact whether you support those businesses, or not.

That said, do you know where most of the support to Conn Ave business come from? All the people who live in the immediate vicinity of Connecticut Avenue. All of those high density buildings from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase have tens of thousands of residents, many more than all of the single family homes that are adjacent to the Avenue. The businesses should be making it a priority to cater to those residents rather than submit to the Maryland commuters who never give a thought to stopping at the businesses on their way out of the city.

There are no studies that show that “business benefit from bike lanes”. It’s a claim that’s repeated but not supported by any academic study so far.

Re (2), if you read carefully you'll see I said that I do support those businesses during the day, when I can use the curbside metered parking on Conn. Ave., which is available until 4pm. Under the new plan, that parking will go away.

If there's enough demand then someone will build a parking garage. Why are you looking for a free handout?

Seriously? “Someone” will build a parking lot? And how is wanting a place to park in order to patronize a business looking for a free handout? I am happy to pay for parking, just as I do now at the meters. What I want is for my tax dollars to support the many and not the few.

There is plenty of parking, but you may need to walk a little more.

That is an ableist, throw away comment.

The parking on the avenue should be only for people who need it - the elderly and ADA needs. If you can drive, then you can park and walk the 40 feet around the corner to get to a store. Or, you can take a cab, or a bus, or an uber.

You aren't really this clueless are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you live along Conn Ave you are perfectly situated to take metro to work

Just take it, stop driving everywhere

This isn't about commuting to work. It is about getting from one neighborhood to another. It is about our kids being able to bike safely to school, etc.

Stop thinking about it solely as a "need to get downtown" thing.

I support the bike lanes. I'm saying that the ppl complaining about the impact on their drive downtown should take metro

I bike with my kids to the Zoo sometimes from Wakefield and we ride on the sidewalk bc there is no other safe option. It sucks

Maybe it's not a good idea to ride your bike in a major city? Maybe it's an especially bad idea to allow children to ride bicycles in a major city? It's not safe and it is never, ever, ever going to be safe.

When I lived in Capitol Hill we biked as a family all the time and felt very safe. Bc Cap Hill has good bike lanes. Nothing is perfectly safe (including DRIVING EVERYWHERE) and biking makes a ton of sense as a way to get around in a city. We should work to make it safer for everyone.

Here here. Whenever I go to NW I am very surprised by the lack of bike lanes compared to the Hill.

Upper NW is above the fall line; it's very hilly and has an older population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess what I don’t understand is that if you scroll through the Twitter feeds of the pro bike lane crowd it’s filled with hysterical, border line self congratulatory “gotcha” tweets filled with pics cars, contractors, construction workers, first responders, etc. parked illegally in bike lanes all over the city. Along with pictures of broken and blighted bike lane infrastructure and desperate calls for 311 to fix things. But you somehow think CT will be any different? Thanks to your good reporting we already know how this will go. No thank you.

What it proves is that curb access is actually very important to economic activity in the city and taking this important public resource and giving it over to a small handful of cyclists doesn’t seem very wise.

There will be 24/7 curb access on one side of the street, something that doesn't exist today.

Almost all of the business have some form of alley or rear access, if needed. These days, those are barely used.

Both statements are ridiculous. Curb access currently exists on both sides of the street and will be removed. Additionally, “almost all” is a joke of a statement for business and also does not address deliveries to apartments or god forbid, emergency vehicle access.

So you are saying you know better than traffic engineers worldwide who have cracked the code of how to solve for these questions?

Traffic engineers have not cracked the code. That's a ludicrous statement. And in this case it is clear that they did not take the entire consequences into account. For god's sake the only firehouse serving upper NW is on Connecticut.

There are TWO fired houses on CT and one on Wisc. They are fine and it won't be an issue. There is already traffic on CT Ave, much of it backed up at Military, Nebraska, Van Ness, Porter and in all of Woodley Park. It is already bad. This won't make it worse, and more likely, more people will feel safe to ride a bike in the new lanes and use their cars a little less. That would be a good result, right? Less pollution, more exercise and best of all, fewer cars means more people who are old and have to drive, will have more open lanes and more opportunity to park closer to where they are going.

Win-win.

It is clear that the planning mode of the last century doesn't work unless we invest in putting double decks on our avenues. That isn't feasible, so we need to think about other ways of getting people around.

I think it is hilarious that some people believe there is a great number of people in DC hoping to commute by bike in heels and suits in the soupy DC humidity, or carry their groceries for a family of 5 on a bicycle along with their babies and toddlers; or dress up to go out to a fancy dinner and tuck their silk dresses up and away from bicycle gears as their nicely coiffed hair gets destroyed by the wind and humidity or rain on the way to the fancy restaurant, or drag their elderly mobility impaired family members along in a wagon attached to the end of the bike. So many people jones for that bike commute!

DC weather is great for bikes as a daily commuter vehicle. Not.

This is funny because I’ve actually done most of these things (including bike commuting to work [not in a suit as I change at the office] and carrying groceries for a family of 5 on my back). The humidity is great for shedding pounds in the process. My only frustration about biking in DC is that it took me so long to make the switch.

It's not funny. Most people can't do these things and certainly can't "change at the office."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good luck changing the mayor's mind...

It is a lovely weekend recreational activity for the able bodied who have plenty of leisure time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess what I don’t understand is that if you scroll through the Twitter feeds of the pro bike lane crowd it’s filled with hysterical, border line self congratulatory “gotcha” tweets filled with pics cars, contractors, construction workers, first responders, etc. parked illegally in bike lanes all over the city. Along with pictures of broken and blighted bike lane infrastructure and desperate calls for 311 to fix things. But you somehow think CT will be any different? Thanks to your good reporting we already know how this will go. No thank you.

What it proves is that curb access is actually very important to economic activity in the city and taking this important public resource and giving it over to a small handful of cyclists doesn’t seem very wise.

There will be 24/7 curb access on one side of the street, something that doesn't exist today.

Almost all of the business have some form of alley or rear access, if needed. These days, those are barely used.

Both statements are ridiculous. Curb access currently exists on both sides of the street and will be removed. Additionally, “almost all” is a joke of a statement for business and also does not address deliveries to apartments or god forbid, emergency vehicle access.

So you are saying you know better than traffic engineers worldwide who have cracked the code of how to solve for these questions?

Traffic engineers have not cracked the code. That's a ludicrous statement. And in this case it is clear that they did not take the entire consequences into account. For god's sake the only firehouse serving upper NW is on Connecticut.

There are TWO fired houses on CT and one on Wisc. They are fine and it won't be an issue. There is already traffic on CT Ave, much of it backed up at Military, Nebraska, Van Ness, Porter and in all of Woodley Park. It is already bad. This won't make it worse, and more likely, more people will feel safe to ride a bike in the new lanes and use their cars a little less. That would be a good result, right? Less pollution, more exercise and best of all, fewer cars means more people who are old and have to drive, will have more open lanes and more opportunity to park closer to where they are going.

Win-win.

It is clear that the planning mode of the last century doesn't work unless we invest in putting double decks on our avenues. That isn't feasible, so we need to think about other ways of getting people around.

I think it is hilarious that some people believe there is a great number of people in DC hoping to commute by bike in heels and suits in the soupy DC humidity, or carry their groceries for a family of 5 on a bicycle along with their babies and toddlers; or dress up to go out to a fancy dinner and tuck their silk dresses up and away from bicycle gears as their nicely coiffed hair gets destroyed by the wind and humidity or rain on the way to the fancy restaurant, or drag their elderly mobility impaired family members along in a wagon attached to the end of the bike. So many people jones for that bike commute!

DC weather is great for bikes as a daily commuter vehicle. Not.

This is funny because I’ve actually done most of these things (including bike commuting to work [not in a suit as I change at the office] and carrying groceries for a family of 5 on my back). The humidity is great for shedding pounds in the process. My only frustration about biking in DC is that it took me so long to make the switch.

It's not funny. Most people can't do these things and certainly can't "change at the office."

Most people with office jobs can change at the office