DC bike group says fewer now riding bikes to work than in 2012 (?!?!)

[Anonymous]

Lots of people are biking in downtown and not always for commuting to work. People bike to get places they want to be. It's not just about 9 to 5 jobs or school. But the bike lanes at rush hour actually have bike traffic now.

[Anonymous]

More than 10,000 bikers is a lot. Why are you so mad about efforts to keep them safe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously unless you add a denominator of trips to work in the region, this is a pointless stat.

100% this.
A lot of bike commuters are not coming in to office as much now, so fewer trips. Also more telecommuting has resulted in generally less traffic and easier parking, so for some commuters the convenience advantage of biking has decreased.

I agree that if there is big and successful RTO push, we will see more bike commuters.

There is nothing more full of excuses than cycling advocates force to look at data confirming that their hobby is exactly as popular as it appears to be.

And the number of bike commuters started falling a couple years *before* the pandemic.

Other transportation surveys show driving is becoming a lot more popular in DC.

VMT is still down in DC proper since the pandemic. Traffic just seems worse because drivers have gotten worse.

Nothing to do with less road capacity in what is an ongoing failed experiment in online transportation meme turned policy “reduced demand”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More than 10,000 bikers is a lot. Why are you so mad about efforts to keep them safe?

Where’s the guy talking about numerators and denominators?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously unless you add a denominator of trips to work in the region, this is a pointless stat.

100% this.
A lot of bike commuters are not coming in to office as much now, so fewer trips. Also more telecommuting has resulted in generally less traffic and easier parking, so for some commuters the convenience advantage of biking has decreased.

I agree that if there is big and successful RTO push, we will see more bike commuters.

There is nothing more full of excuses than cycling advocates force to look at data confirming that their hobby is exactly as popular as it appears to be.

And the number of bike commuters started falling a couple years *before* the pandemic.

Other transportation surveys show driving is becoming a lot more popular in DC.

VMT is still down in DC proper since the pandemic. Traffic just seems worse because drivers have gotten worse.

Nothing to do with less road capacity in what is an ongoing failed experiment in online transportation meme turned policy “reduced demand”.

How much road capacity has DC lost in the last say 5 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 10,000 bikers is a lot. Why are you so mad about efforts to keep them safe?

Where’s the guy talking about numerators and denominators?

these are two different points …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously unless you add a denominator of trips to work in the region, this is a pointless stat.

100% this.
A lot of bike commuters are not coming in to office as much now, so fewer trips. Also more telecommuting has resulted in generally less traffic and easier parking, so for some commuters the convenience advantage of biking has decreased.

I agree that if there is big and successful RTO push, we will see more bike commuters.

There is nothing more full of excuses than cycling advocates force to look at data confirming that their hobby is exactly as popular as it appears to be.

And the number of bike commuters started falling a couple years *before* the pandemic.

Other transportation surveys show driving is becoming a lot more popular in DC.

VMT is still down in DC proper since the pandemic. Traffic just seems worse because drivers have gotten worse.

Nothing to do with less road capacity in what is an ongoing failed experiment in online transportation meme turned policy “reduced demand”.

The whole point of DDOT's policy has been a deliberate effort to increase congestion under the miaguided theory that doing so makes roads safer.

Traffic is worse now because DDOT tried to make it worse.

[Anonymous]

This has been studied ad infinitum.

If you look at Europe where cycling is at its apotheosis you will see three major differences that distinguish:

1) zoning excellence- government planned but ensures each neighborhood has grocery, school, and sport field a cycle away. (5-7 minutes)

2) there are not cycling lanes in isolation except to connect towns

3) girl adoption - you see girls, girls, girls on bikes - and they look fabulous (not in full cycling attire but often in their jeans and yes, miniskirts). They are cycling for bread or to pick up their children

4) if women feel safe, they allow their children the independence to ride to their friends house or soccer practice

5) enforcement of traffic laws - I’m sorry but our streets in DMV have become speedway for NASCAR wannabes. So add law enforcement abjugation of their responsibilities to enforce basic traffic law after George Floyd. Utterly despicable in my view. And every GPS warns of speed cameras. So the peds in crosswalks is the ‘broken glass’ theory in general policing.

6) cell phones - so many distracted drivers

I cycled to work in Europe for two blissful years. My bike has remained in my garage with flat tires for the past 4.

[Anonymous]

I can't imagine biking to work in a skirt suit in 98 degree summer weather after dropping kids at school at 8, and looking remotely presentable when I arrive at 10 (and ready for a nap). Then I think about explaining why I have to leave at 1 to get my kids from school at 3.

[Anonymous]

Clearly more than three reasons - sorry kid distraction:

Point 5 more clearly written:

5) enforcement of traffic laws - I’m sorry but our streets in DMV have become speedway for NASCAR wannabes. So add law enforcement abjugation of their responsibilities to enforce basic traffic law after George Floyd. Utterly despicable in my view. And every GPS warns of speed cameras. So I’d argue failure to enforce ‘pedestrians in crosswalk laws’ is akin to the broken glass’ theory in general policing. Enforcing that law gets most ‘violent’ off streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This has been studied ad infinitum.

If you look at Europe where cycling is at its apotheosis you will see three major differences that distinguish:

1) zoning excellence- government planned but ensures each neighborhood has grocery, school, and sport field a cycle away. (5-7 minutes)

2) there are not cycling lanes in isolation except to connect towns

3) girl adoption - you see girls, girls, girls on bikes - and they look fabulous (not in full cycling attire but often in their jeans and yes, miniskirts). They are cycling for bread or to pick up their children

4) if women feel safe, they allow their children the independence to ride to their friends house or soccer practice

5) enforcement of traffic laws - I’m sorry but our streets in DMV have become speedway for NASCAR wannabes. So add law enforcement abjugation of their responsibilities to enforce basic traffic law after George Floyd. Utterly despicable in my view. And every GPS warns of speed cameras. So the peds in crosswalks is the ‘broken glass’ theory in general policing.

6) cell phones - so many distracted drivers

I cycled to work in Europe for two blissful years. My bike has remained in my garage with flat tires for the past 4.

It’s also weather. Sure it gets cold like here, but it doesn’t usually have the hot humid weather which make you DISGUSTING on a bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone tell the anti-car zealots at DDOT. They seem to think that if they make traffic terrible enough (ahem, "road diet"), that everyone will switch to bikes. The data make clear that's not happening.

DDOT officials get dressed down here by Black Washingtonians telling them they don't want their bike lanes: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/11/15/bike-lanes-road-safety-south-dakota-avenue/

That article is very worth reading. But I also think it's more complicated than what you describe (though yes there is 100% the element of newer, richer, white residents advocating for bike lanes over the objections of longtime black residents, and the point the article makes about many of those residents having fought against things like destroying those neighborhoods to expand I95 is important context that the bike lanes advocates don't always understand).

But some other key takeaways:

-- The bike lanes on South Dakota appear to be less about serving actual demand for bike lanes and more about the fact that bike lanes are the cheapest traffic calming measure DDOT has at their disposal. The real issue in South Dakota appears to be speeding and pedestrian safety, but more expensive traffic calming measures (that have other benefits like making the neighborhood look and feel nicer to be in) aren't in the table. Things like widening sidewalks, installing permanent curb bumpouts at intersections to protect pedestrians, or installing raised medians. Those are expensive, a painted bike lane is cheap.

-- The residents opposing the bike lanes are NOT fans if the speeding and dangerous driving on SD avenue. They hate it. They just don't think bike lanes will solve it-- they think they will increase congestion which will lead to more dangerous driving, and push it into neighboring, residential streets. DDOT has proposed measures to address those concerns but like bike lanes, they are cheap and may not work-- bollards and other temporary installments that may have some impact on speeding and dangerous driving but won't stop it. The article also discussed speed cameras but notes that drivers know where they are and just slow down temporarily and then return to speeding, and that the city struggles to collect fines from out if state drivers.

-- A nearby bike lane proposal in Taylor Street is NOT facing this opposition and actually has the broad support of residents and businesses. That bike lane offers commuting potential for kids to a number if schools and will hook up with the MBT, which businesses think could be a boon for them. Taylor is also not a major through street and has less of a speeding issue than SD Ave. Which makes a bike lane there more appealing-- cyclists don't actually want to ride in painted bike lanes next to speeding traffic! It's dangerous.

So my takeaway is that a major problem with bike lanes in DC is that they are being used as a cheap traffic calming alternative in places where better traffic calming infrastructure is needed, but where there may be minimal demand for bike lanes specifically. If the city instead sought buy in for medians and wider sidewalks and safer pedestrian crossings, they'd face less opposition from residents (out of state drivers would still hate it, but if the goal is to make streets safer, that should not be the primary concern). Bike lanes make sense in places where people already WANT them and where it's already fairly safe to bike. Imposing them on major thoroughfares where there isn't demand in the hope it will slow down drivers and make the road more hospitable to pedestrians and bikes alike us putting the cart before the horse. No wonder you see a lot of arguments over bike lanes if this is their approach.

But if course DC needs money to create safe roads the right way. Different issue. But it dues not appear that painted bike lanes all over the city are the cheap solution they want them to be.

Building connectivity on collector roads really is such a no-brainer. To do a bike lane right on an arterial is a heavy and expensive lift. You could connect 5X as many collector routes for the same cost/effort.

I agree; it seems like a no brainer. Major arteries are the worst, least safe, most expensive place for bike routes. And traffic calming measures are needed on all major arteries other than bike lanes.

Actually, we need people calming measures. Too many people drive like jerks no matter what we do to the roads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine biking to work in a skirt suit in 98 degree summer weather after dropping kids at school at 8, and looking remotely presentable when I arrive at 10 (and ready for a nap). Then I think about explaining why I have to leave at 1 to get my kids from school at 3.

Right, your situation is the exact same as everyone elses! FWIW biking is often actually the less sweaty way for me to commute in the summer - slowly pedaling in a breeze beats a 15 minute walk to the metro followed by a boiling metro platform then another walk to the office.

It’s also not difficult to freshen up once you get to the office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone tell the anti-car zealots at DDOT. They seem to think that if they make traffic terrible enough (ahem, "road diet"), that everyone will switch to bikes. The data make clear that's not happening.

DDOT officials get dressed down here by Black Washingtonians telling them they don't want their bike lanes: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/11/15/bike-lanes-road-safety-south-dakota-avenue/

That article is very worth reading. But I also think it's more complicated than what you describe (though yes there is 100% the element of newer, richer, white residents advocating for bike lanes over the objections of longtime black residents, and the point the article makes about many of those residents having fought against things like destroying those neighborhoods to expand I95 is important context that the bike lanes advocates don't always understand).

But some other key takeaways:

-- The bike lanes on South Dakota appear to be less about serving actual demand for bike lanes and more about the fact that bike lanes are the cheapest traffic calming measure DDOT has at their disposal. The real issue in South Dakota appears to be speeding and pedestrian safety, but more expensive traffic calming measures (that have other benefits like making the neighborhood look and feel nicer to be in) aren't in the table. Things like widening sidewalks, installing permanent curb bumpouts at intersections to protect pedestrians, or installing raised medians. Those are expensive, a painted bike lane is cheap.

-- The residents opposing the bike lanes are NOT fans if the speeding and dangerous driving on SD avenue. They hate it. They just don't think bike lanes will solve it-- they think they will increase congestion which will lead to more dangerous driving, and push it into neighboring, residential streets. DDOT has proposed measures to address those concerns but like bike lanes, they are cheap and may not work-- bollards and other temporary installments that may have some impact on speeding and dangerous driving but won't stop it. The article also discussed speed cameras but notes that drivers know where they are and just slow down temporarily and then return to speeding, and that the city struggles to collect fines from out if state drivers.

-- A nearby bike lane proposal in Taylor Street is NOT facing this opposition and actually has the broad support of residents and businesses. That bike lane offers commuting potential for kids to a number if schools and will hook up with the MBT, which businesses think could be a boon for them. Taylor is also not a major through street and has less of a speeding issue than SD Ave. Which makes a bike lane there more appealing-- cyclists don't actually want to ride in painted bike lanes next to speeding traffic! It's dangerous.

So my takeaway is that a major problem with bike lanes in DC is that they are being used as a cheap traffic calming alternative in places where better traffic calming infrastructure is needed, but where there may be minimal demand for bike lanes specifically. If the city instead sought buy in for medians and wider sidewalks and safer pedestrian crossings, they'd face less opposition from residents (out of state drivers would still hate it, but if the goal is to make streets safer, that should not be the primary concern). Bike lanes make sense in places where people already WANT them and where it's already fairly safe to bike. Imposing them on major thoroughfares where there isn't demand in the hope it will slow down drivers and make the road more hospitable to pedestrians and bikes alike us putting the cart before the horse. No wonder you see a lot of arguments over bike lanes if this is their approach.

But if course DC needs money to create safe roads the right way. Different issue. But it dues not appear that painted bike lanes all over the city are the cheap solution they want them to be.

Building connectivity on collector roads really is such a no-brainer. To do a bike lane right on an arterial is a heavy and expensive lift. You could connect 5X as many collector routes for the same cost/effort.

I agree; it seems like a no brainer. Major arteries are the worst, least safe, most expensive place for bike routes. And traffic calming measures are needed on all major arteries other than bike lanes.

Actually, we need people calming measures. Too many people drive like jerks no matter what we do to the roads.

So we need traffic calming on major arterials but it just cannot be bike lanes? Come on that’s ridiculous. Come down to the Hill and check out the protected lanes on C St and Penn Ave. They are wonderful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously unless you add a denominator of trips to work in the region, this is a pointless stat.

100% this.
A lot of bike commuters are not coming in to office as much now, so fewer trips. Also more telecommuting has resulted in generally less traffic and easier parking, so for some commuters the convenience advantage of biking has decreased.

I agree that if there is big and successful RTO push, we will see more bike commuters.

There is nothing more full of excuses than cycling advocates force to look at data confirming that their hobby is exactly as popular as it appears to be.

a numerator without a denominator? lol.

meanwhile CaBi continues to blast through ridership records (actual objective data). https://www.arlnow.com/2024/10/15/e-bikes-fueling-record-setting-local-ridership-numbers-for-capital-bikeshare/

No. Look at the data. It's about three percent. The population of DC doesnt change very much from year to year, so you can just look at the raw numbers. 18,624 bikers in 2017. 13,376 bikers in 2023. That's a 28 percent decline.