Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Dc resident here. This won’t affect my commute at all. I still won’t bike to work (too far and would take too long), and I will either take the bus or the metro to get downtown, or drive during non rush hour

I do feel for Maryland commuters

And anyone on a north south side street. Or a cut thru between conn and reno. Yes traffic will calm. But if that becomes gridlock things could get stupid pretty fast.

Yes yes, cars are bad. I agree! And we are in a new age where many office workers can be more flexible in their routines. But roads do help hundreds of thousands of people get to their jobs, prop up the tax base, allow families to get activities. So it is an important balance.

hope I am wrong and tons of people do bike conn ave. And traffic adjusts and a new safer equilibrium reached. Bookmarking this thread for review later …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

It's not that surprising biking has not caught on here. Washington is kind of a strange place to build a giant bike network. It's really hot and humid here obviously and that will be enough to deter a lot of people. It's a white collar town with a conservative dress code. Way more people here wear suits to work than in other places. If you have to wear a suit to work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike, especially in a place that's hot and humid. Washington is also full of people who work a lot. People don't have much spare time. It seems like you have to have a lot of time on your hands for commuting by bike to make sense.

I don’t have time to be stuck in traffic. I also don’t have the spare disposable income to waste on gas, parking, and car maintenance. I don’t have the energy after work to spend time exercising. Cycling cuts my commute in half, costs me almost nothing, and saves me the need to go to a gym or run for half an hour every day. I take a change of clothes in my bag and use deodorant and a towel. No one I work with would know I commute by bike.

Well, you would be stuck in traffic if you were obeying traffic laws.

[Anonymous]

Anony CB mous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the sinf Louisburgide streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

Sign it however you want. This tired line has been disproven over and over on this thread.

Signed, doesn’t really matter bc the majority of ppl clearly support this and it’s already happening so too bad

No it hasn't and no they don't. All you say is that by eliminating traffic lanes traffic will magically disappear. That ten thousand people per day will instantly start bicycling. Meanwhile DDOT says 7,000 vehicles per day will use cut throughs. Tripling neighborhood traffic. Cutting through the very areas that everyone walks and bikes in.

At the same time every time someone new finds out about this plan they're up in arms about the lunacy of it. Almost everyone supporting it on this thread is not local to the area and is just generally supporting the idea of bike lanes. Almost everyone opposed is local to the area and opposing this specific plan not bike lanes in general.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

It's not that surprising biking has not caught on here. Washington is kind of a strange place to build a giant bike network. It's really hot and humid here obviously and that will be enough to deter a lot of people. It's a white collar town with a conservative dress code. Way more people here wear suits to work than in other places. If you have to wear a suit to work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike, especially in a place that's hot and humid. Washington is also full of people who work a lot. People don't have much spare time. It seems like you have to have a lot of time on your hands for commuting by bike to make sense.

WTF are you talking about? The number of cyclists doubled between 2010 and 2015. How many other modes of transport doubled their users in 5 years. Add in scooter use, e-bikes etc. and I’d wager you have an order of magnitude increase from 2010 to 2022.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anony CB mous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the sinf Louisburgide streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

Sign it however you want. This tired line has been disproven over and over on this thread.

Signed, doesn’t really matter bc the majority of ppl clearly support this and it’s already happening so too bad

No it hasn't and no they don't. All you say is that by eliminating traffic lanes traffic will magically disappear. That ten thousand people per day will instantly start bicycling. Meanwhile DDOT says 7,000 vehicles per day will use cut throughs. Tripling neighborhood traffic. Cutting through the very areas that everyone walks and bikes in.

At the same time every time someone new finds out about this plan they're up in arms about the lunacy of it. Almost everyone supporting it on this thread is not local to the area and is just generally supporting the idea of bike lanes. Almost everyone opposed is local to the area and opposing this specific plan not bike lanes in general.

You have an amazing about of demographic data at your hands for an anonymous forum. Please share more!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the side streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

If you’re really worried about cut through traffic (which is an issue for a lot of neighborhoods with artery roads without bike lanes), ask DDOT to install speed bumps. The risk that some streets experience cut through traffic is not a good argument against the bike lanes.

Speed humps are not meant to mitigate the volume of traffic, but rather the speed.

DC is a grid, you can't just close off public space in the form of streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

It's not that surprising biking has not caught on here. Washington is kind of a strange place to build a giant bike network. It's really hot and humid here obviously and that will be enough to deter a lot of people. It's a white collar town with a conservative dress code. Way more people here wear suits to work than in other places. If you have to wear a suit to work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike, especially in a place that's hot and humid. Washington is also full of people who work a lot. People don't have much spare time. It seems like you have to have a lot of time on your hands for commuting by bike to make sense.

I don’t have time to be stuck in traffic. I also don’t have the spare disposable income to waste on gas, parking, and car maintenance. I don’t have the energy after work to spend time exercising. Cycling cuts my commute in half, costs me almost nothing, and saves me the need to go to a gym or run for half an hour every day. I take a change of clothes in my bag and use deodorant and a towel. No one I work with would know I commute by bike.

+1 biking to work is maybe 3-4 minutes longer per day. I’ll pay that cost over gas and having to sit in trafffic. I’m lucky enough to have a good bike network though and I can’t wait till that’s the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

It's not that surprising biking has not caught on here. Washington is kind of a strange place to build a giant bike network. It's really hot and humid here obviously and that will be enough to deter a lot of people. It's a white collar town with a conservative dress code. Way more people here wear suits to work than in other places. If you have to wear a suit to work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike, especially in a place that's hot and humid. Washington is also full of people who work a lot. People don't have much spare time. It seems like you have to have a lot of time on your hands for commuting by bike to make sense.

I don’t have time to be stuck in traffic. I also don’t have the spare disposable income to waste on gas, parking, and car maintenance. I don’t have the energy after work to spend time exercising. Cycling cuts my commute in half, costs me almost nothing, and saves me the need to go to a gym or run for half an hour every day. I take a change of clothes in my bag and use deodorant and a towel. No one I work with would know I commute by bike.

Well, you would be stuck in traffic if you were obeying traffic laws.

??? Bikes can pop on tia sidewalk legally anywhere but the old city/downtown. So if cars are clogging the roads, it is perfectly legal to bypass them. You are just jealous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

It's not that surprising biking has not caught on here. Washington is kind of a strange place to build a giant bike network. It's really hot and humid here obviously and that will be enough to deter a lot of people. It's a white collar town with a conservative dress code. Way more people here wear suits to work than in other places. If you have to wear a suit to work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike, especially in a place that's hot and humid. Washington is also full of people who work a lot. People don't have much spare time. It seems like you have to have a lot of time on your hands for commuting by bike to make sense.

I don’t have time to be stuck in traffic. I also don’t have the spare disposable income to waste on gas, parking, and car maintenance. I don’t have the energy after work to spend time exercising. Cycling cuts my commute in half, costs me almost nothing, and saves me the need to go to a gym or run for half an hour every day. I take a change of clothes in my bag and use deodorant and a towel. No one I work with would know I commute by bike.

Well, you would be stuck in traffic if you were obeying traffic laws.

Here we go with that again. I’d love to monitor your speedometer and obedience in actually stopping at stop lines. I’ve yet to encounter a driver - including myself - who is not a raving hypocrite in criticizing cyclists’ failure to adhere to traffic laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not 1922, people. We have decades of data now to have a complete picture of how subsidizing car dependence affects cities and their inhabitants.

No one who is remotely informed and objective could argue that it is in the interests of a city like DC to subsidize an activity that reduces urban property values, destroys civic culture, pollutes the air, accelerates climate change, kills and maims pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers alike, fuels political polarization, and wastes hours upon hours of commuter’s time on this earth.

We get it that some of you are hopelessly addicted to your cars and the suburban lifestyles they support, but trying to disguise the fact that you think public policy should be made to serve your interests and not the greater good by making baselessly claims and fat-shaming people is a little pathetic.

I mean, there are a lot of things I’d like that I wish the government would just give me, but I’m not silly enough to go on public forums and whine about not getting them.

Let me guess: You're a senior in high school? This sounds like something a senior in high school would say.

Cognitive skills and social consciousness decline from about age 18 on, so thanks for the compliment. Maybe you should start listening to more HS seniors.

But practical experience about how people respond to stimuli in real life goes through the roof. You know, the ability to predict outcomes. That's what everyone is pointing out. Vehicles will not magically disappear from the road. Thousands won't start biking on Connecticut Avenue. It will be a cluster...

And btw cognitive skills dont start declining until the 30's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anony CB mous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the sinf Louisburgide streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

Sign it however you want. This tired line has been disproven over and over on this thread.

Signed, doesn’t really matter bc the majority of ppl clearly support this and it’s already happening so too bad

No it hasn't and no they don't. All you say is that by eliminating traffic lanes traffic will magically disappear. That ten thousand people per day will instantly start bicycling. Meanwhile DDOT says 7,000 vehicles per day will use cut throughs. Tripling neighborhood traffic. Cutting through the very areas that everyone walks and bikes in.

At the same time every time someone new finds out about this plan they're up in arms about the lunacy of it. Almost everyone supporting it on this thread is not local to the area and is just generally supporting the idea of bike lanes. Almost everyone opposed is local to the area and opposing this specific plan not bike lanes in general.

You have an amazing about of demographic data at your hands for an anonymous forum. Please share more!

I have the exact same amount of demographic data as the person I was responding too. The difference is that they have poor judgement and believe that cars will magically disappear and thousands will take up bicycle commuting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the side streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

If you’re really worried about cut through traffic (which is an issue for a lot of neighborhoods with artery roads without bike lanes), ask DDOT to install speed bumps. The risk that some streets experience cut through traffic is not a good argument against the bike lanes.

Speed humps are not meant to mitigate the volume of traffic, but rather the speed.

DC is a grid, you can't just close off public space in the form of streets.

So your problem is just that people may drive down your street? Find a better problem to worry about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the side streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

If you’re really worried about cut through traffic (which is an issue for a lot of neighborhoods with artery roads without bike lanes), ask DDOT to install speed bumps. The risk that some streets experience cut through traffic is not a good argument against the bike lanes.

Speed humps are not meant to mitigate the volume of traffic, but rather the speed.

DC is a grid, you can't just close off public space in the form of streets.

Who is closing streets?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will push more commuting cars onto reno road and wisconsin who then will cut through neighborhoods to get to rock creek, you are just "calming" traffic (e.g. creating gridlock) on Conn Ave and pumping tons of cars onto peoples residential streets, which are not made for it, which is worse for the environment and the city - but you can now feel superior coasting down your bike lane on Conn Ave. There is no reason bikes can't use the side streets, they are safer - it just takes longer and the bike's want to hijack a lane on the most direct route (signed a pedestrian, not a driver)

If you’re really worried about cut through traffic (which is an issue for a lot of neighborhoods with artery roads without bike lanes), ask DDOT to install speed bumps. The risk that some streets experience cut through traffic is not a good argument against the bike lanes.

Speed bumps increase emergency vehicle response time, are noisy, and increase car emissions. Please move back to Petworth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any mode of transportation that is *less* popular in Washington D.C. than biking?

People are more likely to drive or take the metro or take the bus or walk or carpool or take commuter rail or take a cab than they are to ride a bike.

And yet it's biking, the city's least popular way of getting around, that sponges up such a massive share of our transportation resources. It's bizarre.

Consider maybe that it’s not popular because it only has a tiny fraction of the infrastructure dedicated to cars and pedestrians?

The notion that DC is spending billions building bike lanes is absurd. The figure probably doesn’t exceed a few million annually, most of which is accounted for by hopeless community consultations in which crusty NIMBYs roll out fantastical nonsense to safeguard a selfish way of life that is doing immense damage to future generations.

If you want to talk about billions in subsidies, check out everything related to building and maintaining automotive infrastructure that gas taxes and car registrations don’t cover. Drivers are some of the biggest welfare queens around.

The popularity of cycling has not increased in any measurable way as a mode share of commuters since 1970. There is literally zero evidence that bicycle infrastructure induces more bicycling as a mode of transportation for commuting to work.

Great. Here is but one study that proves you are wrong: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457517301021. Will you please shut up now?

In case you have not noticed, Seville is in Spain and is not Washington, D.C. where the number of cyclists commuting to work is barely measurable despite significant investment in cycling infrastructure.

https://www.centerforwashingtonareastudies.org/state_of_the_capital_region/2022/_book/Intro.html

It’s cute how you think you can convince people that cycling in DC hasn’t increased by presenting statistics that don’t even disaggregate cycling as a category. In fact, the proportion of the population who cycle almost doubled from 2010 to 2015: https://wtop.com/local/2017/05/many-people-really-bike-work-around-dc-surprising-stats/

You argument is that if you removed taxis and motorcycles that it would make the bicycle mode share larger? It’s barely measurable combined. Did you bother to check the numbers in the article you posted? It says 4% cycle to work. 4 percent! 80% use cars. Sure, going from 2 to 4 is doubling, but when starting from such a small base its rather meaningless.