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:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder: Only two percent of commuters ride bikes. That's not two percent of the population. Half the people in D.C. don't work because they're retired or children or whatever so they aren't counted among commuters. Probably the only mode of transportation that's used less is scooters.

This is a lot of resources to dedicate to something hardly anyone uses.

Barely any resources (or roadway) space has been dedicated to people who bike - it is astonishing anyone bikes considering how difficult and unsafe it is.

However in DC neighborhoods that have built safe bike infra the percentage of trips done on bikes is much higher than 2 percent.

How many people in D.C. ride bikes? Maybe 500? How much has the government spent over the past decade? Three billion? That's quite a bit of money spent on very few people.

My favorite bike expenditure: The city has people whose full time jobs it is to clean bike lanes. Concierge service for bikers in a city with a poverty rate that matches West Virginia's.

There you go again tossing around billions.

The 15th Street bike lane alone routinely gets 3000 riders a day. But maybe it is those 500 just biking back and forth all day!

This has been thoroughly debunked multiple times already in this thread - under 5% of DDOT's annual budget goes toward bike and pedestrian infra. DDOT has literally 2 FTE's who focus on bike infra and just a handful who focus on pedestrian issues in a city where 40% of households don't even have cars.

This notion that 40 percent of households don't own cars is complete B.S.

There's 288,000 households in DC. There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 cars that aren't registered because the city charges people thousands of dollars for the privilege of having their data keyed into the city's database.

If 40 percent of households didn't own cars, that would mean those 400,000 cars are owned by 173,000 households, which would mean the average car owning household owns 2.3 cars. That's obviously wrong. Most of the people I know and that you know who have cars have one single car.

Weirdly the Census Bureau has been tracking this for decades and it has been remarkably consistent. There are tens of thousands of DC plated cars that aren't owned by residents - WMATA & MPD alone each have over a thousand and I believe other DC agencies own several thousand more as does the Federal Government.

BTW the city doesn't charge anyone thousands of dollars for having a car "keyed into the city's databast" - you must not be a DC resident if you believe that.

I paid several thousand dollars to register my car a few months ago.

annual registration is not the same as the one time purchase/excise tax

I paid earlier this year almost $4,000 to register a used car. There's a million fees they charge when you get a car. It doesnt matter whether they call them fees or taxes or happy funtime payments, and it doesnt matter if they charge you them annually or biannually or only once or whenever you get a new car. They're all registration fees.

No, if any of them are taxes based on the price of the car then they are taxes; not fees. Same way you pay taxes on anything you buy. You are not being charged for owning a car, you are being charged for buying a very expensive piece of machinery

Yeah, that makes no sense. This is just word games.

I give up if you don't know the difference between sales tax and vehicle registration fees.

It's a pointless distinction. It's all just money the city takes from you if you want to register your car.

If you buy a computer, you pay sales tax. If you buy a phone, you pay sales tax. If you buy a soda, you pay sales tax. If you buy a car, you pay... Holy crap, sales tax! But you must be right... Buying a car is *obviously* being specially taxed for the purchase.

Computers, phones, and soda don't routinely cause death destruction and mayhem that requires the ability to trace ownership via registration.

[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:Reminder: Only two percent of commuters ride bikes. That's not two percent of the population. Half the people in D.C. don't work because they're retired or children or whatever so they aren't counted among commuters. Probably the only mode of transportation that's used less is scooters.

This is a lot of resources to dedicate to something hardly anyone uses.

Barely any resources (or roadway) space has been dedicated to people who bike - it is astonishing anyone bikes considering how difficult and unsafe it is.

However in DC neighborhoods that have built safe bike infra the percentage of trips done on bikes is much higher than 2 percent.

How many people in D.C. ride bikes? Maybe 500? How much has the government spent over the past decade? Three billion? That's quite a bit of money spent on very few people.

My favorite bike expenditure: The city has people whose full time jobs it is to clean bike lanes. Concierge service for bikers in a city with a poverty rate that matches West Virginia's.

There you go again tossing around billions.

The 15th Street bike lane alone routinely gets 3000 riders a day. But maybe it is those 500 just biking back and forth all day!

This has been thoroughly debunked multiple times already in this thread - under 5% of DDOT's annual budget goes toward bike and pedestrian infra. DDOT has literally 2 FTE's who focus on bike infra and just a handful who focus on pedestrian issues in a city where 40% of households don't even have cars.

This notion that 40 percent of households don't own cars is complete B.S.

There's 288,000 households in DC. There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 cars that aren't registered because the city charges people thousands of dollars for the privilege of having their data keyed into the city's database.

If 40 percent of households didn't own cars, that would mean those 400,000 cars are owned by 173,000 households, which would mean the average car owning household owns 2.3 cars. That's obviously wrong. Most of the people I know and that you know who have cars have one single car.

Weirdly the Census Bureau has been tracking this for decades and it has been remarkably consistent. There are tens of thousands of DC plated cars that aren't owned by residents - WMATA & MPD alone each have over a thousand and I believe other DC agencies own several thousand more as does the Federal Government.

BTW the city doesn't charge anyone thousands of dollars for having a car "keyed into the city's databast" - you must not be a DC resident if you believe that.

I paid several thousand dollars to register my car a few months ago.

annual registration is not the same as the one time purchase/excise tax

I paid earlier this year almost $4,000 to register a used car. There's a million fees they charge when you get a car. It doesnt matter whether they call them fees or taxes or happy funtime payments, and it doesnt matter if they charge you them annually or biannually or only once or whenever you get a new car. They're all registration fees.

No, if any of them are taxes based on the price of the car then they are taxes; not fees. Same way you pay taxes on anything you buy. You are not being charged for owning a car, you are being charged for buying a very expensive piece of machinery

Yeah, that makes no sense. This is just word games.

I give up if you don't know the difference between sales tax and vehicle registration fees.

It's a pointless distinction. It's all just money the city takes from you if you want to register your car.

If you buy a computer, you pay sales tax. If you buy a phone, you pay sales tax. If you buy a soda, you pay sales tax. If you buy a car, you pay... Holy crap, sales tax! But you must be right... Buying a car is *obviously* being specially taxed for the purchase.

Computers, phones, and soda don't routinely cause death destruction and mayhem that requires the ability to trace ownership via registration.

Point is that all those things require sales tax to be paid. The only thing different for the car is the (relatively small) tag fee. PP was trying to claim the sales tax paid at registration was some special car tax. It isn't. It is just sales tax.

[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:Reminder: Only two percent of commuters ride bikes. That's not two percent of the population. Half the people in D.C. don't work because they're retired or children or whatever so they aren't counted among commuters. Probably the only mode of transportation that's used less is scooters.

This is a lot of resources to dedicate to something hardly anyone uses.

Barely any resources (or roadway) space has been dedicated to people who bike - it is astonishing anyone bikes considering how difficult and unsafe it is.

However in DC neighborhoods that have built safe bike infra the percentage of trips done on bikes is much higher than 2 percent.

How many people in D.C. ride bikes? Maybe 500? How much has the government spent over the past decade? Three billion? That's quite a bit of money spent on very few people.

My favorite bike expenditure: The city has people whose full time jobs it is to clean bike lanes. Concierge service for bikers in a city with a poverty rate that matches West Virginia's.

There you go again tossing around billions.

The 15th Street bike lane alone routinely gets 3000 riders a day. But maybe it is those 500 just biking back and forth all day!

This has been thoroughly debunked multiple times already in this thread - under 5% of DDOT's annual budget goes toward bike and pedestrian infra. DDOT has literally 2 FTE's who focus on bike infra and just a handful who focus on pedestrian issues in a city where 40% of households don't even have cars.

This notion that 40 percent of households don't own cars is complete B.S.

There's 288,000 households in DC. There's 300,000 cars currently registered with the city. There's probably another 100,000 cars that aren't registered because the city charges people thousands of dollars for the privilege of having their data keyed into the city's database.

If 40 percent of households didn't own cars, that would mean those 400,000 cars are owned by 173,000 households, which would mean the average car owning household owns 2.3 cars. That's obviously wrong. Most of the people I know and that you know who have cars have one single car.

Weirdly the Census Bureau has been tracking this for decades and it has been remarkably consistent. There are tens of thousands of DC plated cars that aren't owned by residents - WMATA & MPD alone each have over a thousand and I believe other DC agencies own several thousand more as does the Federal Government.

BTW the city doesn't charge anyone thousands of dollars for having a car "keyed into the city's databast" - you must not be a DC resident if you believe that.

I paid several thousand dollars to register my car a few months ago.

annual registration is not the same as the one time purchase/excise tax

I paid earlier this year almost $4,000 to register a used car. There's a million fees they charge when you get a car. It doesnt matter whether they call them fees or taxes or happy funtime payments, and it doesnt matter if they charge you them annually or biannually or only once or whenever you get a new car. They're all registration fees.

No, if any of them are taxes based on the price of the car then they are taxes; not fees. Same way you pay taxes on anything you buy. You are not being charged for owning a car, you are being charged for buying a very expensive piece of machinery

Yeah, that makes no sense. This is just word games.

I give up if you don't know the difference between sales tax and vehicle registration fees.

It's a pointless distinction. It's all just money the city takes from you if you want to register your car.

If you buy a computer, you pay sales tax. If you buy a phone, you pay sales tax. If you buy a soda, you pay sales tax. If you buy a car, you pay... Holy crap, sales tax! But you must be right... Buying a car is *obviously* being specially taxed for the purchase.

Computers, phones, and soda don't routinely cause death destruction and mayhem that requires the ability to trace ownership via registration.

Point is that all those things require sales tax to be paid. The only thing different for the car is the (relatively small) tag fee. PP was trying to claim the sales tax paid at registration was some special car tax. It isn't. It is just sales tax.

That's silly. I don't get special treatment for paying more sales tax on other stuff I buy.

[Anonymous]

Thich Quang Duc immolated himself and sparked a movement. This is probably the best bet for bike lane opponents now.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit challenging DDOT's decision making here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit challenging DDOT's decision making here.

Based on?

DDOT has conducted the studies.
The ANCs have been given great weight.
Th Mayor has made the decision, just as has happened in dozens of miles of bike lanes across the city.

The only reason to do this is delay. Which wastes money. taxpayers money that could go to helping the homeless or other worthy causes.

[Anonymous]

This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

Self serving and tacky. Anyone that claims this issue is going away is wrong. It's a letter to the editor. Whoopdido

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit challenging DDOT's decision making here.

Based on?

DDOT has conducted the studies.
The ANCs have been given great weight.
Th Mayor has made the decision, just as has happened in dozens of miles of bike lanes across the city.

The only reason to do this is delay. Which wastes money. taxpayers money that could go to helping the homeless or other worthy causes.

When DDOT conducted its "studies" (more like projections based on assumptions), a key assumption was that Beach Drive would be available for traffic diverting from Connecticut Avenue as the result of reducing vehicle traffic lanes. No longer. DDOT at a minimum needs to go back to confirm its traffic diversion analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

Self serving and tacky. Anyone that claims this issue is going away is wrong. It's a letter to the editor. Whoopdido

If opponents of the bike lanes want to keep it as an issue, then they are the ones who are dividing the community. The issue has been settled. There has been an election which has further settled it. This is the transportation trend globally over the past 15 years, and DC is just playing catch up.

Look, after the results of the 2022 election, many pundits said "the kids have voted for the future they want, we should listen to them"

Maybe it is time for the old guard NIMBYs in Ward 3 to heed the same advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit challenging DDOT's decision making here.

Based on?

DDOT has conducted the studies.
The ANCs have been given great weight.
Th Mayor has made the decision, just as has happened in dozens of miles of bike lanes across the city.

The only reason to do this is delay. Which wastes money. taxpayers money that could go to helping the homeless or other worthy causes.

When DDOT conducted its "studies" (more like projections based on assumptions), a key assumption was that Beach Drive would be available for traffic diverting from Connecticut Avenue as the result of reducing vehicle traffic lanes. No longer. DDOT at a minimum needs to go back to confirm its traffic diversion analysis.

Beech drive has been closed for over two years. The reversible lanes have been closed for over 2 years. What we see now is what it is going to be. IOW, nothing majorly different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

Self serving and tacky. Anyone that claims this issue is going away is wrong. It's a letter to the editor. Whoopdido

If opponents of the bike lanes want to keep it as an issue, then they are the ones who are dividing the community. The issue has been settled. There has been an election which has further settled it. This is the transportation trend globally over the past 15 years, and DC is just playing catch up.

Look, after the results of the 2022 election, many pundits said "the kids have voted for the future they want, we should listen to them"

Maybe it is time for the old guard NIMBYs in Ward 3 to heed the same advice.

Recent transplants shouldn't be speaking for the community

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lawsuit challenging DDOT's decision making here.

Based on?

DDOT has conducted the studies.
The ANCs have been given great weight.
Th Mayor has made the decision, just as has happened in dozens of miles of bike lanes across the city.

The only reason to do this is delay. Which wastes money. taxpayers money that could go to helping the homeless or other worthy causes.

When DDOT conducted its "studies" (more like projections based on assumptions), a key assumption was that Beach Drive would be available for traffic diverting from Connecticut Avenue as the result of reducing vehicle traffic lanes. No longer. DDOT at a minimum needs to go back to confirm its traffic diversion analysis.

Beech drive has been closed for over two years. The reversible lanes have been closed for over 2 years. What we see now is what it is going to be. IOW, nothing majorly different.

The study assumed Beach Drive would be open

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

Self serving and tacky. Anyone that claims this issue is going away is wrong. It's a letter to the editor. Whoopdido

If opponents of the bike lanes want to keep it as an issue, then they are the ones who are dividing the community. The issue has been settled. There has been an election which has further settled it. This is the transportation trend globally over the past 15 years, and DC is just playing catch up.

Look, after the results of the 2022 election, many pundits said "the kids have voted for the future they want, we should listen to them"

Maybe it is time for the old guard NIMBYs in Ward 3 to heed the same advice.

Recent transplants shouldn't be speaking for the community

I am the person you ar eresponding to. I have lived here over 55 years. Am I a recent transplant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This about sums it up

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/13/bicycle-advocates-won/

Self serving and tacky. Anyone that claims this issue is going away is wrong. It's a letter to the editor. Whoopdido

If opponents of the bike lanes want to keep it as an issue, then they are the ones who are dividing the community. The issue has been settled. There has been an election which has further settled it. This is the transportation trend globally over the past 15 years, and DC is just playing catch up.

Look, after the results of the 2022 election, many pundits said "the kids have voted for the future they want, we should listen to them"

Maybe it is time for the old guard NIMBYs in Ward 3 to heed the same advice.

Recent transplants shouldn't be speaking for the community

Elections speak for the community. Good thing we just had one.