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:

Anonymous wrote:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

[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:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

Try reading the law and stop playing games. A classified ad in the CityPaper would be insufficient on its own for notice.

Source: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/1-309.11#(c)

OMG you are one of a kind. Having a hard time seeing the forest? The funniest part is that it's true. A classified ad in Street Sense plus 4 telephone pole notes counts as notice.

Sassiness aside, your reading comprehension is severely lacking. Go back and re-read the code.

[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:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

City Paper no longer publishes a print edition, so there's really no chance that an ad there could possibly count as legal notice.

[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:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Huh? That you Fetterman?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

Drivers treating Conn Ave as a commuter superhighway is what's dangerous for the seniors. The traffic calming aspect will only help with this.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Huh? That you Fetterman?

I like Fetterman, but smiled at that.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

Try reading the law and stop playing games. A classified ad in the CityPaper would be insufficient on its own for notice.

Source: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/1-309.11#(c)

OMG you are one of a kind. Having a hard time seeing the forest? The funniest part is that it's true. A classified ad in Street Sense plus 4 telephone pole notes counts as notice.

Sassiness aside, your reading comprehension is severely lacking. Go back and re-read the code.

Lol, heal thyself. Did you even look at your cite?

[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:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Construction workers are biking from Damascus and Manassas?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Construction workers are biking from Damascus and Manassas?

In this magical new world everyone will ride bikes. A few may even ride unicorns!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

Try reading the law and stop playing games. A classified ad in the CityPaper would be insufficient on its own for notice.

Source: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/1-309.11#(c)

OMG you are one of a kind. Having a hard time seeing the forest? The funniest part is that it's true. A classified ad in Street Sense plus 4 telephone pole notes counts as notice.

Sassiness aside, your reading comprehension is severely lacking. Go back and re-read the code.

Lol, heal thyself. Did you even look at your cite?

You were wrong initially when you said that notice could be satisfied by publishing in the CityPaper. You then switched to Street Sense plus 4 telephone poles. There's a bit more detail in the code, such as pointing out that the notice has to be conspicuously posted in each SMD. But reading closely has not been your thing. To quote you yet again, OMG you are one of a kind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Like I said, will see how it goes. I have looked at the plans and am glad they are being thoughtful about left turn lanes, but remain skeptical that the bike lanes do anything beyond signaling the city is concerned about traffic deaths (and climate, marginally) without actually meaningfully increasing the attractiveness of public transit options.

Also, if you think trucks will stick to the marked loading zones, well, skeptical there as well. You get two lanes downtown, one blocked by a truck. Fun.

Remain hopeful my fears are unfounded and all the planning is successful Am glad the deathtrap 4-2 reversible lanes are done. Don’t care a wit about street parking. But let’s not pretend that there is some uncertainty about how this play out.

Also, get those speed bumps rolled out asap on the side streets!

If one lives on a side street, the left turn channels in the plan are among the worst features. If Connecticut Ave is congested — which seems quite likely with only two rush hour lanes — the left turn channels become inviting off-ramps for drivers to turn into Porter, Ordway, Macomb, etc to find a faster bypass route. Between the Connecticut congestion and the left turn off-ramps, the side streets will be overwhelmed with diverting traffic.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Don’t forget the Lime scooters. The best way to get your kids to pre-school!

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Construction workers are biking from Damascus and Manassas?

In this magical new world everyone will ride bikes. A few may even ride unicorns!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

Try reading the law and stop playing games. A classified ad in the CityPaper would be insufficient on its own for notice.

Source: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/1-309.11#(c)

OMG you are one of a kind. Having a hard time seeing the forest? The funniest part is that it's true. A classified ad in Street Sense plus 4 telephone pole notes counts as notice.

Sassiness aside, your reading comprehension is severely lacking. Go back and re-read the code.

Lol, heal thyself. Did you even look at your cite?

You were wrong initially when you said that notice could be satisfied by publishing in the CityPaper. You then switched to Street Sense plus 4 telephone poles. There's a bit more detail in the code, such as pointing out that the notice has to be conspicuously posted in each SMD. But reading closely has not been your thing. To quote you yet again, OMG you are one of a kind.

Keep digging

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To recap:

1. The lion's share of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association's $2 million budget comes from the D.C. government. Very few people actually donate to them. Membership dues amount to about $100,000.

2. WABA appears to be illegally using this taxpayer money to lobby the DC government on bike lanes.

3. WABA says it's not just lobbying, that it has an educational mission too. But that educational mission appears to boil down to renting $100 bikes for children in PE classes at school to the city at more than $1,000 a pop.

Everything about bike lanes reeks of special interest politics.

Driving commuters are a minority of the population, at least in DC. It is also true that driving commuters impose a whole load of negative externalities for the rest of the population, an incomplete list of which includes air pollution, road congestion, physical injuries and death, cultural decay, and political polarization. Given all of this, your point that providing a viable means by which people can commute in ways that do not impose these negative externalities on the rest of the population is a very curious one, to the say the least.

There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 that aren't registered (it's criminally expensive to register your car). This is out of 670,000 people.

There are so few cyclists in this city they are almost a rounding error. Often they're thrown in an "other" category because there's so few of them.

Only about 40% of the households own cars, so do the math.

Also, out of those "670,000" people, many are too young or too old to drive. And many more are too poor to own a car.

And what does "criminally expensive" mean? We need the money to help maintain the roads and clean up the polluted air. If drivers actually paid the costs to our society, driving would be a heck of a lot more expensive.

Maybe cyclists could stop being such freeloaders?

Drivers pay for everything. They pay gas taxes and licensing fees and registration fees and traffic citations and income taxes.

Cyclists don't pay the gas tax, they dont pay licensing fees or registration fees, they dont pay any traffic citations (despite routinely flouting traffic laws) and there's so few cyclists that their income taxes all put together wouldn't be enough to build a single protected bike lane.

Another canard. Gas taxes, licenses, registrations fees etc. generate a fraction of the costs that are required to construct and maintain the road infrastructure. Cyclists subsidize drivers, not the other way around.

i can't wait to hear this. please explain to us how the 300 people who use bike lanes in dc actually pay for all the roads. this should be good.

Everyone who pays income, property, or sales taxes in DC - which includes almost cyclists - subsidizes drivers. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I think the main issue is that there are very few cyclists so whatever taxes they pay don't amount to very much money.

I’m one of the 30% in DC that doesn’t own a car. I should get a discount on my taxes!

Do you get food and Amazon deliveries? Do you want fire/EMS service? Do you use Uber? Yes to any of these means you have a car.

Ever have a newspaper delivered? Package couriered? Congratulations, you are a bicyclist.

Bike couriers and bike newspaper delivery? LOL! I loved the 80s too. We should grab lunch at Duke Zeiberts some time.

True. These days it's more like construction labor. So, I guess if we live in houses we're bicyclists!

Construction workers are biking from Damascus and Manassas?

In this magical new world everyone will ride bikes. A few may even ride unicorns!

They'll use a tandem cargo bike!