Connecticut Ave bike lanes are back!

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What the f???

I thought this was done.

I thought the biker bros had lost.

It is done. It’s Charles Allen and his bike bros being nihilists. Just like the K St Transitway, the city cannot have anything nice unless it has bike lanes.

The reality is that this means that CT Ave won’t get pedestrian safety improvements but hilariously enough they could revert back to rush hour parking rules.

It’s basically just a back door way of making budget cuts while looking smug but actually being an a-hole. Classic Charles Allen.


Keep your hands off Ward 3.


Apparently this is also Matt “Pickleball” Frumin’s position - no Conn bike lanes, no more safety improvements.


Frumin is maddening. His colleagues repaid him for his loyal vote on progressive legislation the past 1.5 years by unanimously embarrassing him last week on legislation for housing voucher rules. His sole legislative accomplishment is “Old People Are Cool Month.” And he spends the vast majority of his time focusing on deed restrictions that have been legally unenforceable for generations.

He’s just getting his lunch eaten every day and I’m sure his colleagues love having an incompetent W3 councilmember


I think it's harsh to call Frumin incompetent. But he does seem to see himself more as at At-Large DC Councilmember rather than as Ward 3's Councilmember, which is the job to which he was elected.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


Here he goes again. Defund Pedestrian Safety.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


More like under Option 3, pedestrians stepping off a bus will get whacked by speeding cyclists as they try to cross the bike lanes to get to the curb. You wouldn't want that to happen to someone's grandma.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


More like under Option 3, pedestrians stepping off a bus will get whacked by speeding cyclists as they try to cross the bike lanes to get to the curb. You wouldn't want that to happen to someone's grandma.


Option C, the bike lane plan.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


This is what the "middle finger" bike lane advocates on the local ANC advocated. They passed a resolution that said defund any Connecticut improvements that don't include bike lanes. Allen must have listened to them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It's time to make Connecticut avenue a grand boulevard that works for people living, working and being around it. Not the cars that drive through.


Right. More drive-through traffic can go on Porter Street or Reno Road.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


I'm listening. Please, tell us more about this.


I saw another page of people claiming this is an anti pedestrian measure. Still waiting for an explanation how.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What the f???

I thought this was done.

I thought the biker bros had lost.


We have been working on this project for like a decade. If you think we were like "ah well, lost the mayor to downtown commercial building pocketbook, guess we should just pack it up and accept our fates of becoming meat pancakes to a speeding MD commuter with paper plates" you were fooling yourself.

Do you not understand that DC is broke? You seem to be the only one fooling yourself. This is just locking in the status quo and every Councilmember not named Frumin are happy to take capital transportation projects from Ward 3.


Broke and about to pass out housing benefits to those SELF CERTIFYING income.

This Council is gunning for a control board 2.0.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What the f???

I thought this was done.

I thought the biker bros had lost.


We have been working on this project for like a decade. If you think we were like "ah well, lost the mayor to downtown commercial building pocketbook, guess we should just pack it up and accept our fates of becoming meat pancakes to a speeding MD commuter with paper plates" you were fooling yourself.

Do you not understand that DC is broke? You seem to be the only one fooling yourself. This is just locking in the status quo and every Councilmember not named Frumin are happy to take capital transportation projects from Ward 3.


Broke and about to pass out housing benefits to those SELF CERTIFYING income.

This Council is gunning for a control board 2.0.


Will the Council now let DC taxpayers "self-certify" their DC income? No more withholding and W-2s.

Nah, didn't think so.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What the f???

I thought this was done.

I thought the biker bros had lost.


We have been working on this project for like a decade. If you think we were like "ah well, lost the mayor to downtown commercial building pocketbook, guess we should just pack it up and accept our fates of becoming meat pancakes to a speeding MD commuter with paper plates" you were fooling yourself.

Do you not understand that DC is broke? You seem to be the only one fooling yourself. This is just locking in the status quo and every Councilmember not named Frumin are happy to take capital transportation projects from Ward 3.


Broke and about to pass out housing benefits to those SELF CERTIFYING income.

This Council is gunning for a control board 2.0.


They drank Frumin’s milkshake on the self certification for housing. He thought going along with them on silly progressive policies would by him some good will on voucher relief. He thought wrong, again.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


I'm listening. Please, tell us more about this.


If you don’t know then you don’t know.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


I'm listening. Please, tell us more about this.


If you don’t know then you don’t know.


Well, I guess I have to assume it's just propaganda if nobody can explain the facts behind the rhetoric
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


More like under Option 3, pedestrians stepping off a bus will get whacked by speeding cyclists as they try to cross the bike lanes to get to the curb. You wouldn't want that to happen to someone's grandma.


Yep, this is the Connecticut Avenue that Charles Allen wants:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">WARNING We've been filming the chaotic & downright dangerous situation at the Westminster Bridge floating bus stop at St Thomas' hospital. Clip includes a speeding cyclist crashing into an elderly person. These designs are not safe & they need to be urgently halted <a href="https://twitter.com/Mark_J_Harper?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Mark_J_Harper</a> <a href="https://t.co/MrScNnWLs7">pic.twitter.com/MrScNnWLs7</a></p>— NFBUK (@NFBUK) <a href="https://twitter.com/NFBUK/status/1787211980027101194?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


More like under Option 3, pedestrians stepping off a bus will get whacked by speeding cyclists as they try to cross the bike lanes to get to the curb. You wouldn't want that to happen to someone's grandma.


Yep, this is the Connecticut Avenue that Charles Allen wants:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">WARNING We've been filming the chaotic & downright dangerous situation at the Westminster Bridge floating bus stop at St Thomas' hospital. Clip includes a speeding cyclist crashing into an elderly person. These designs are not safe & they need to be urgently halted <a href="https://twitter.com/Mark_J_Harper?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Mark_J_Harper</a> <a href="https://t.co/MrScNnWLs7">pic.twitter.com/MrScNnWLs7</a></p>— NFBUK (@NFBUK) <a href="https://twitter.com/NFBUK/status/1787211980027101194?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Sorry:

https://twitter.com/NFBUK/status/1787211980027101194
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So the criminal lobby’s friend, Charles Allen, now wants to prevent DDOT from funding any safety improvements at all along Connecticut Ave. (like a raised crosswalk on Davenport and Connecticut so that Murch kids can walk more safely to school) UNLESS Allen gets his bike lanes.

Is Allen a bratty child or a public servant?!


Never mind, this is my favorite tantrum

And when pedestrians die will you consider that a tantrum too?


Your doomsaying doesn't work on me

Apparently only bike lives matter. You folks are exactly who you present yourselves. Pedestrian safety = scaremongering. Incredible.


Agree. What makes this move so outrageous is that the alternative they chase is safer for pedestrians than the alternative that Allen wants. He’s completely throwing pedestrians under the bus for the sake of cyclists.


More like under Option 3, pedestrians stepping off a bus will get whacked by speeding cyclists as they try to cross the bike lanes to get to the curb. You wouldn't want that to happen to someone's grandma.


Yep, this is the Connecticut Avenue that Charles Allen wants:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">WARNING We've been filming the chaotic & downright dangerous situation at the Westminster Bridge floating bus stop at St Thomas' hospital. Clip includes a speeding cyclist crashing into an elderly person. These designs are not safe & they need to be urgently halted <a href="https://twitter.com/Mark_J_Harper?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Mark_J_Harper</a> <a href="https://t.co/MrScNnWLs7">pic.twitter.com/MrScNnWLs7</a></p>— NFBUK (@NFBUK) <a href="https://twitter.com/NFBUK/status/1787211980027101194?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


These have existed on Pennsylvania ave now for at least a few months and I haven't heard of a single incident of a cyclist clipping someone getting off a bus. We know how to look up when we ride.
post reply Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Message Quick Reply
Go to: