Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs a full lane for a bike lane? That’s absurd. I see a biker every 3 days. A walker every mile. You’re just loud and obnoxious and pretend you know how to cycle.

It is roughly half a car lane for a bike lane. The opponents are once again engaging in hyperbole and half-truths.

How many cyclists? It doesn’t matter because we should encourage responsible cycling (not what passes for it when men hit a make menopause). We are blessed with a huge sidewalk. Today there were no walkers, none. Share the sidewalk, land on the edge on each corner.

And yet, the pedestrians rightfully don't feel safe with cyclists on the sidewalks. Given the use of sidewalks for strollers, wheelchairs, walkers, canes, little kids, older people etc, it seems like the better solution is to havae a dedicated area for bikes, just like there is a dedicated area for cars, buses and trucks.

They do everywhere else:
Amsterdam Paris, Geneva, Berlin?

Add barriers and clear marks, there is more room than on any street in central Amsterdam.

The propensity of this Council to create additional problems when the solution is simple astounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

You are pulling quite the GOP stain there., Frumin has been in office for a few weeks, and yet the crime issue is all his fault.

No I’m not. The crime is bad and people have tried to get an answer from the Council who won’t even use the word “crime”.
Matt’s had his 100 days no? And he wants to calm the traffic? How about calm the crime first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said anything about your stupid bike lane. Your funeral.

I said traffic calming measures are stupid.

This is easy. One sidewalk for bikes, one for people, one or no lanes for parking, cars zoom, all is well.

This is what we are getting.

The outer sidewalk is for people on both sides of CT Ave.
The inner sidewalk, or bike lane, is for people on bikes and scooters;
The inner most area, 4 lanes, are for cars.

Thanks for agreeing.

I’m not agreeing. Bike lane takes out a sidewalk not a car lane.

W

Why should pedestrians experience and space be degraded so you can park your car?

What are you an elephant? It’s a massive sidewalk on both sides. Adding a bike lane on the edge going one way us the safest options for all the traffic participants. When you all go to Europe you oooh and aaah over t hi s kind of a thing but in Murica you need a square mile per person. Gimme a break.

[Anonymous]

Hey Matt, dis you? You can’t make this up - read the last sentence and get to work. I don’t know anyone in Ward 3 who isn’t rethinking their vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

Oh, you're an avid cyclist! Well, in that case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs a full lane for a bike lane? That’s absurd. I see a biker every 3 days. A walker every mile. You’re just loud and obnoxious and pretend you know how to cycle.

It is roughly half a car lane for a bike lane. The opponents are once again engaging in hyperbole and half-truths.

How many cyclists? It doesn’t matter because we should encourage responsible cycling (not what passes for it when men hit a make menopause). We are blessed with a huge sidewalk. Today there were no walkers, none. Share the sidewalk, land on the edge on each corner.

And yet, the pedestrians rightfully don't feel safe with cyclists on the sidewalks. Given the use of sidewalks for strollers, wheelchairs, walkers, canes, little kids, older people etc, it seems like the better solution is to havae a dedicated area for bikes, just like there is a dedicated area for cars, buses and trucks.

What are you a kindergarten that just walk 5 abreast with strollers? Are you saying you don’t feel safe in Amsterdam, Berlin or Geneva? Sure sounds like a you problem. The sidewalks are bigger than anything in those cities and the bike lane would be one way and clearly delineated with crosswalks as normal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

Oh, you're an avid cyclist! Well, in that case.

I’m going to bet anything you are a MAMIL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

You are pulling quite the GOP stain there., Frumin has been in office for a few weeks, and yet the crime issue is all his fault.

No I’m not. The crime is bad and people have tried to get an answer from the Council who won’t even use the word “crime”.
Matt’s had his 100 days no? And he wants to calm the traffic? How about calm the crime first.

Just for what it's worth, he was sworn in 65 days ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs a full lane for a bike lane? That’s absurd. I see a biker every 3 days. A walker every mile. You’re just loud and obnoxious and pretend you know how to cycle.

It is roughly half a car lane for a bike lane. The opponents are once again engaging in hyperbole and half-truths.

How many cyclists? It doesn’t matter because we should encourage responsible cycling (not what passes for it when men hit a make menopause). We are blessed with a huge sidewalk. Today there were no walkers, none. Share the sidewalk, land on the edge on each corner.

And yet, the pedestrians rightfully don't feel safe with cyclists on the sidewalks. Given the use of sidewalks for strollers, wheelchairs, walkers, canes, little kids, older people etc, it seems like the better solution is to havae a dedicated area for bikes, just like there is a dedicated area for cars, buses and trucks.

What are you a kindergarten that just walk 5 abreast with strollers? Are you saying you don’t feel safe in Amsterdam, Berlin or Geneva? Sure sounds like a you problem. The sidewalks are bigger than anything in those cities and the bike lane would be one way and clearly delineated with crosswalks as normal

Citing Amsterdam, Berlin, and Geneva as reasons to maintain Connecticut Avenue as all 6 lanes for cars, lol.

[Anonymous]

What are you citing? The incompetent urban planning?

What’s wrong with these cities. Cyclepaths are the safest and most efficient way to bring bikes to all and protect cars, bikers and pedestrians.

You’re just stirring trouble where there need not be any. Go pass another Cuba resolution that no one cares what you think about, why don’t you?

This is easy - win win win. More business for the restaurants too. Add a one way cycle path on each sidewalk. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

You are pulling quite the GOP stain there., Frumin has been in office for a few weeks, and yet the crime issue is all his fault.

No I’m not. The crime is bad and people have tried to get an answer from the Council who won’t even use the word “crime”.
Matt’s had his 100 days no? And he wants to calm the traffic? How about calm the crime first.

And still can’t say “crime”? But the new ANC can flip off the constituents. Grow up.

Just for what it's worth, he was sworn in 65 days ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are you citing? The incompetent urban planning?

What’s wrong with these cities. Cyclepaths are the safest and most efficient way to bring bikes to all and protect cars, bikers and pedestrians.

You’re just stirring trouble where there need not be any. Go pass another Cuba resolution that no one cares what you think about, why don’t you?

This is easy - win win win. More business for the restaurants too. Add a one way cycle path on each sidewalk. Done.

Yep. I'm glad you agree. Bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue!

[Anonymous]

Cycle paths on the sidewalk, delineated, MAMIL, like in every civilized city on Earth.

But this tracks with the city elected official. You mean to carry on how you started by flipping off the constituency.

Keep at it and see how it goes. On my street my and it’s a big one no one is planning to vote for you again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs a full lane for a bike lane? That’s absurd. I see a biker every 3 days. A walker every mile. You’re just loud and obnoxious and pretend you know how to cycle.

It is roughly half a car lane for a bike lane. The opponents are once again engaging in hyperbole and half-truths.

How many cyclists? It doesn’t matter because we should encourage responsible cycling (not what passes for it when men hit a make menopause). We are blessed with a huge sidewalk. Today there were no walkers, none. Share the sidewalk, land on the edge on each corner.

And yet, the pedestrians rightfully don't feel safe with cyclists on the sidewalks. Given the use of sidewalks for strollers, wheelchairs, walkers, canes, little kids, older people etc, it seems like the better solution is to havae a dedicated area for bikes, just like there is a dedicated area for cars, buses and trucks.

They do everywhere else:
Amsterdam Paris, Geneva, Berlin?

Add barriers and clear marks, there is more room than on any street in central Amsterdam.

The propensity of this Council to create additional problems when the solution is simple astounds.

"this council"?

The bike lanes have been discussed and debated since 2017/2018 and the mayor decided to move forward with it in 2022. "This council" has less than nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just calling the emperor naked.
Learn the rules to cycling. I cycle and am appalled by a majority of cyclists’ ignorance or arrogance in not behaving according to the road rules. I’d also rather cycle in a designated narrow labs on each massive sidewalk so I’m not endangered by the cars or pretend-can-cycle MAMILs (middle aged men in lycra).
We drive DC so don’t want any further traffic calming on a road which is a major artery with tons of traffic lights that takes 45 minutes of gridlock to get anywhere in a rush hour before Matt Frumin further cocks up everything for everyone (Matt go deal with crime in Ward 3 and the national embarrassment you all have created for this city; a whole hunch if cars were broken into last night and contractors won’t come to your ward any longer).

You are pulling quite the GOP stain there., Frumin has been in office for a few weeks, and yet the crime issue is all his fault.

No I’m not. The crime is bad and people have tried to get an answer from the Council who won’t even use the word “crime”.
Matt’s had his 100 days no? And he wants to calm the traffic? How about calm the crime first.

Calming traffic is mitigating speeding. Speeding is a crime. Problem solved.