Connecticut Avenue bike lane officially dead

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

They're allowed to take Metro or a bus.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

They're allowed to take Metro or a bus.

As are cyclists.

[Anonymous]

MPD came out against the bike lanes because they will increase response time. I believe the police and wish we had more of them.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

So you were not ok with one lane being taken for bike lanes, but you are ok with two lanes being taken for restriction-less (ie during Rush Hour as well) parking.

Please explain to me like I am five, why the former is not ok, but the latter is, and how the waze-crazed traffic you feared when one lane was being taken for bike lanes was a problem, but two lanes being taken for parking is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

DC is not going to turn into a bike city bc it is a humid swamp here a chunk of the year with a lot of rain (incl late afternoon thunderstorms during evening commute time), and who wants to commute on a bike in that weather.

You realize office places have showers now, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MPD came out against the bike lanes because they will increase response time. I believe the police and wish we had more of them.

That was the police unions, mostly comprised of suburbanites, not MPD itself. Please be accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MPD came out against the bike lanes because they will increase response time. I believe the police and wish we had more of them.

That was the police unions, mostly comprised of suburbanites, not MPD itself. Please be accurate.

Right. The cohort of police who are removed from political pressure and actually do the dangerous part. They know the streets better than the bike lobbyists. That is accurate.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

I will gladly give up the bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue when Maryland decides to pay it's fair share of dedicated funding in perpetuity to WMATA. Until then, I say more bike lanes, crack down on MD drivers who rack up tickets and don't have to pay and also drive through our neighborhoods like they are actively trying to kill children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are more bicyclists on this moronic thread than there are in all the bikes lanes in DC

It’s just one or maybe two fanatics posting non-stop.

Even so, still true

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

You didn't answer the question because you are probably single and have no idea what life is like with children in the k-12 range.

You’re a creep. That is why no one is answering your questions.

I didn't ask a question. Just a new person who noticed that you didn't answer a question and still haven't answered the question because you are out of touch and don't what it's like to have the demands of a family. You want to impose your selfish view on everyone just so that you can ride your bike -- and bypass other public transportations options -- to go drink your beer or latte. Something that those of us with kids are far too busy to do. And yet here you are posting on a forum filled with people with kids who just don't have time for your nonsense. If people need to get to work, there are existing bike options if they so choose. The demand isn't there and never was there.

Family guy here, not the one you have been answering with. Our kids ride, we ride, we would ride more if it were safer, which is why we support more bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue and across the city and region. We ride to kids sporting events - soccer and baseball, we ride to their music classes (no, not a stand-up Bass) and art classes. We prefer riding to any other mode because of the flexibility and exercise. Our familiy riding takes two cars off the road and frees up parking spots for those who have no other option but to drive, so drivers should be happy about our choices and support our call for a safer path for us.

+1

Anti-bike people are short-sighted idiots, to put it nicely.

Probably no better advocates against bike lanes and the bike lane advocates. Please keep doing more of what you’re doing. There will likely be several more policy victories, like removing already installed bike lanes.

Making a city activitely more hostile to bikers and pedestrians is not a “victory.” It’s actually pathetic.

They are making it more safe for pedestrians. Pedestrian interests and cyclist interests are not the same.

DP: I agree that they are not the same. This plan is going to push more bikes onto sidewalks, negatively impacting the pedestrian experience

This. I hate riding on sidewalks and always feel sheepish about it. No more.

Just resist the urge to ride like a complete a-hole and it will be just fine.

But if you insist on tearing down the sidewalk like a spandex clad cheetah screeching at everyone in “your” way, then you’re going to have problems.

DP and you're right I'll just stick to the road. As a driver please resist the urge to drive like a complete a hole tearing down ct ave and honking at every biker in "your" way. Otherwise, you'll have problems.

I don’t drive like an a-hole, so it shouldn’t be a problem.

But if you decide to keep running red lights and stop signs, maybe we’ll meet one day. You’ll be the one going into the ambulance while I’m laughing with the police, telling them how you ran a red light right in front of me and then went underneath my car. Then we’ll watch my dashcam video and laugh some more. The cops will make sure I have your name and personal info so I can pass it on to my insurance company, who will come after you for the damage your body caused to my car.

I’ll wave bye bye as they close the back doors of the ambo. If you’re conscious, you’ll see me

It's like everyone on two wheels now ignores not only stop signs but traffic lights too. I see people on bikes, people on e-bikes, people on mopeds and scooters and people on giant motorcycles just going full speed through red traffic lights. It's amazing. They are going to get themselves killed.

My theory is that when they made Idaho Stops legal, it created a mentality of permissiveness about lawlessness for cyclists. No one knows what the law actuals says or means and there has no education. So a lot of cyclists probably think that their self-serving, risky behavior is legal and acceptable.

I think the culture of lawlessness started with cyclists, but now it's spread to people on scooters and ebikes and motorcycles. It's like the traffic version of the broken windows theory. People see cyclists getting away with it, which makes them wonder why they're bothering to obey the law.

+1

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

So you were not ok with one lane being taken for bike lanes, but you are ok with two lanes being taken for restriction-less (ie during Rush Hour as well) parking.

Please explain to me like I am five, why the former is not ok, but the latter is, and how the waze-crazed traffic you feared when one lane was being taken for bike lanes was a problem, but two lanes being taken for parking is not.

It's not. It's still a bad idea but at least it's cheaper.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

I will gladly give up the bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue when Maryland decides to pay its fair share of dedicated funding in perpetuity to WMATA. Until then, I say more bike lanes, crack down on MD drivers who rack up tickets and don't have to pay and also drive through our neighborhoods like they are actively trying to kill children.

It’s not clear to me why a certain segment of the DC urbanist/cyclist activist scene hates Maryland so much. Some of it is racism. But I think most of it is a determination to fight against their obvious future selves.

The fact is that Maryland is the first jurisdiction that committed the additional funds to meet WMATAs shortfall, without even bothering to negotiate concessions.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

So you were not ok with one lane being taken for bike lanes, but you are ok with two lanes being taken for restriction-less (ie during Rush Hour as well) parking.

Please explain to me like I am five, why the former is not ok, but the latter is, and how the waze-crazed traffic you feared when one lane was being taken for bike lanes was a problem, but two lanes being taken for parking is not.

It's not. It's still a bad idea but at least it's cheaper.

It’s also the status quo. They are just going to add some curb bump outs.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

So you were not ok with one lane being taken for bike lanes, but you are ok with two lanes being taken for restriction-less (ie during Rush Hour as well) parking.

Please explain to me like I am five, why the former is not ok, but the latter is, and how the waze-crazed traffic you feared when one lane was being taken for bike lanes was a problem, but two lanes being taken for parking is not.

It's not. It's still a bad idea but at least it's cheaper.

It’s also the status quo. They are just going to add some curb bump outs.

The status quo would be rush hour restrictions. Those are being lifted.

Adding bump-outs would preclude going back to three lanes, or having bus lanes in the future. That seems shortsighted.

[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:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

Would you like a social security number as well?

The point is not hard to grasp, unless of course you know nothing about life in DC or are suffering from the cognitive dissonance associated with espousing policies that are deeply detrimental to the quality of life enjoyed by DC residents.

There is no way my kids would have been able to participate in the breadth of activities they’ve enjoyed across DC if they didn’t have bikes. We are somewhat cavalier perhaps in letting them ride on streets without protected bike lanes. But many other parents are not and I get that.

Guess you should get a car then. Your kids could do even more that way.

You do realize that most parents in this city work, do you not? How the kids supposed to get around when their parents are at work? Do you really want them out there jacking cars?

Yeah, carjacking kids would have stopped if only they had bikes to ride instead. On that note, carjackings are down this year in some wards by as much 80 percent.

But if you had kids, you would know how school commuting works. The kids are at school for most of the work day. In Ward 3, where you are targeting, kids either go to their local walkable neighborhood public school or they go to the private schools. In both instances, there are a bevy of extracurricular programs that last until the end of the school day so parents can pick them up after work if needed. And WFH has made it easier to have the flexibility to pick up kids immediately after school.

Bless you for having a predictable work schedule and/or WFH. Many of the rest of us don't enjoy such luxuries.

Moreover, the system you describe is nuts. It adds tens of thousands of cars to DC's streets, creating further congestion, pollution, and injuries, and all for what?

if the city provides a safe alternative to driving, more people will use it, freeing up road space for the cars whose drivers need to drive. this is really not a hard equation to understand and somehow, around the world, other cities have done this with great success.

Bike lanes are useful and desirable, but it's also important to remember that Connecticut Ave is a major artery between Montgomery County and Upper Northwest and downtown Washington DC. Constraining it will force Waze-crazed drivers to divert to other roads, including neighborhood streets. Washington DC already has miles or bike lanes and trails, but it seems that's not enough for the WABA lobbyists, because for example the Rock Creek Park trail doesn't have bars and cafes along it.

So you were not ok with one lane being taken for bike lanes, but you are ok with two lanes being taken for restriction-less (ie during Rush Hour as well) parking.

Please explain to me like I am five, why the former is not ok, but the latter is, and how the waze-crazed traffic you feared when one lane was being taken for bike lanes was a problem, but two lanes being taken for parking is not.

It's not. It's still a bad idea but at least it's cheaper.

They are still going to spend 9 million dollars.
There will still be the neighborhood traffic nightmare proffered by the opposition.
There will still be Connecticut Avenue and "evacuation route" issues proffered by the opposition.

Now add, cyclists will be riding in the middle of the center lane, far enough from the right side to avoid being "doored" by anyone accessing one of the parked cars up and down Connecticut Avenue.