Thanks to the bike party organizers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

A sampling of what's in the mayor's new budget:

$84 million for bike trails
$56 million for Vision Zero
$52 million for bike bridge to Virginia
$32 million for bike safety
$11.5 million for bike bridge to Anacostia
$10 million for Capital Bikeshare

Let's see the citation for $84 million in bike trails.
The va bridge has already been shown to be a federal expense

It's all in the mayor's budget! It's on her web site. (also that $52 million is coming from DC, not the feds, which is why it's in her budget).

Show, don't tell. You made the claim, stand behind it.

I already did. It's in the FY2025 budget. It's on her web site. You can search it using the word "bicycle" and you'll find that and many, many, many other very dubious projects.

I've done exactly what you said and all of the capital improvement projects you mention - save Capital Bikeshare, which generates revenue for the city - serve pedestrians as well as cyclists. As for the Long Bridge Project (https://vapassengerrailauthority.org/longbridgeproject/) you've been railing against, DC seems to be providing all of $350,000 towards this $52 million project that - again - serves pedestrians, cyclists, and almost everyone else that is using a mode of transportation other than a motor vehicle, train, boat, airplane, or helicopter.

No one is asking for this absurd bridge except cyclists. WABA has a long list of particulars that it wants to see with it though. https://waba.org/details/long-bridge/

The bridge costs $52 million and those costs are stretched out over more than one fiscal year. Fairly certain they aren't just going to build $350,000 worth of bridge and then just stop.

I do not know the full details but it's a $2 billion project, the primary purpose of which is to expand the rail crossing. I have no idea why any part of this is so expensive but $52 million, no matter who is paying for it, is way too much for a bike bridge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

A sampling of what's in the mayor's new budget:

$84 million for bike trails
$56 million for Vision Zero
$52 million for bike bridge to Virginia
$32 million for bike safety
$11.5 million for bike bridge to Anacostia
$10 million for Capital Bikeshare

Let's see the citation for $84 million in bike trails.
The va bridge has already been shown to be a federal expense

It's all in the mayor's budget! It's on her web site. (also that $52 million is coming from DC, not the feds, which is why it's in her budget).

Show, don't tell. You made the claim, stand behind it.

I already did. It's in the FY2025 budget. It's on her web site. You can search it using the word "bicycle" and you'll find that and many, many, many other very dubious projects.

I've done exactly what you said and all of the capital improvement projects you mention - save Capital Bikeshare, which generates revenue for the city - serve pedestrians as well as cyclists. As for the Long Bridge Project (https://vapassengerrailauthority.org/longbridgeproject/) you've been railing against, DC seems to be providing all of $350,000 towards this $52 million project that - again - serves pedestrians, cyclists, and almost everyone else that is using a mode of transportation other than a motor vehicle, train, boat, airplane, or helicopter.

No one is asking for this absurd bridge except cyclists. WABA has a long list of particulars that it wants to see with it though. https://waba.org/details/long-bridge/

The bridge costs $52 million and those costs are stretched out over more than one fiscal year. Fairly certain they aren't just going to build $350,000 worth of bridge and then just stop.

You are obtuse, aren’t you? The bridge is federally funded. DC is contributing just $350k to the cost. It’s pretty clearly laid out in the budget.

[Anonymous]

"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have more than 150 miles of bike lanes. Seems like more than enough given how few people ride bikes.

We’ve built an entirely new transportation system, costing billions of dollars, for a tiny number of white guys who think they’re too good for the bus

Political power is getting a city with a 20 percent poverty rate, that’s cutting positions in schools because of budget constraints, to spend billions of dollars on your hobby

A sampling of what's in the mayor's new budget:

$84 million for bike trails
$56 million for Vision Zero
$52 million for bike bridge to Virginia
$32 million for bike safety
$11.5 million for bike bridge to Anacostia
$10 million for Capital Bikeshare

Let's see the citation for $84 million in bike trails.
The va bridge has already been shown to be a federal expense

It's all in the mayor's budget! It's on her web site. (also that $52 million is coming from DC, not the feds, which is why it's in her budget).

Show, don't tell. You made the claim, stand behind it.

I already did. It's in the FY2025 budget. It's on her web site. You can search it using the word "bicycle" and you'll find that and many, many, many other very dubious projects.

I've done exactly what you said and all of the capital improvement projects you mention - save Capital Bikeshare, which generates revenue for the city - serve pedestrians as well as cyclists. As for the Long Bridge Project (https://vapassengerrailauthority.org/longbridgeproject/) you've been railing against, DC seems to be providing all of $350,000 towards this $52 million project that - again - serves pedestrians, cyclists, and almost everyone else that is using a mode of transportation other than a motor vehicle, train, boat, airplane, or helicopter.

No one is asking for this absurd bridge except cyclists. WABA has a long list of particulars that it wants to see with it though. https://waba.org/details/long-bridge/

The bridge costs $52 million and those costs are stretched out over more than one fiscal year. Fairly certain they aren't just going to build $350,000 worth of bridge and then just stop.

Arlington seemed to think it was important enough for their residents to lobby Mark Warner to get finding for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see this type of driver behavior all.the.time.

But sure, its the bikes that are dangerous

The cyclist is traveling in the left lane at a rate of speed 1/3 below the speed limit and normal flow of traffic. The car made a pass that provided a safe distance between the cyclist and the vehicle. The cyclist complains that the pass was made over double yellow, okay, but the cyclist continues to travel in the left lane as a slower moving vehicle, demonstrating that they were determined not to let anyone pass them. It’s also funny to see cyclist claim they stopped at red light, when it looks like they are illegally in the crosswalk and the spedometer says 4 MPH, indicating that they are still moving and not actually stopped.

I don't know the cyclist, perhaps they were getting ready to turn left.

Either way, the cyclist has the right to ride in the lane and it is illegal for the driver to cross the double yellow line.

So you are wrong on both counts.

There is no blanket prohibition for crossing a double yellow line in DC. However, the cyclist has recorded themselves committing at least one clear traffic violation.

I've been looking this up and cannot find a reference in the DC regulations to the double yellow line. This is of course covered in the DC Driver Manual and we all know it is illegal, but what specific regulation does it violate?

There is not a specific bright line rule because the law intentionally allows for situations like what the cyclist depicted. Needing to cross for safety reasons while also complying with other laws.

Blowing past a cyclist is not "safety reasons" - that is just being selfish and operating the SUV in question very dangerously.

Cyclists are the least law abiding people on the road. They don't even follow the rules of "Idaho stops," a rule they wanted. They're only allowed to blow stop signs if no one else has the right of way at an intersection.

This really is focusing on the speck in another's eye while ignoring planks in your own territory. Drivers really are completely blind to their own illegal behavior. Speeding is the most obvious, and dangerous one, but the vast majority of drivers at any given point in time are violating one or more laws. Illegal driver behavior is so ingrained it doesn't even feel illegal to most drivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

Where did you just arrive from? Building and maintaining any infrastructure is insanely expensive in this part of the world. The amounts being put into rehabilitating the Northeast Rail Corridor are eye-watering. Googling will take you to a few good articles that explain why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

Where did you just arrive from? Building and maintaining any infrastructure is insanely expensive in this part of the world. The amounts being put into rehabilitating the Northeast Rail Corridor are eye-watering. Googling will take you to a few good articles that explain why.

Context: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/1/27/how-much-does-a-mile-of-road-actually-cost
Keep in mind those numbers are from 2014, so you need to add about 40% for construction inflation.

This bridge is about as expensive as building one mile of collector road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

The city spent $4 million to give bicyclists a place to tie their bikes up at Union Station. FOUR MILLION DOLLARS.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2023/09/02/union-station-dc-bicycles-lawsuit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

The Washington Area Bicyclist Association has been demanding this for years and, even at $52 million, WABA says it's not good enough. They have lots of complaints about how the dimensions aren't exactly what it asked for. Talk about looking a gift horse. They're spending $52 million on a bridge next door to a perfectly fine bridge that's already there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

Where did you just arrive from? Building and maintaining any infrastructure is insanely expensive in this part of the world. The amounts being put into rehabilitating the Northeast Rail Corridor are eye-watering. Googling will take you to a few good articles that explain why.

Rail makes sense. Not only does it have to handle far more weight, vibrations and stress it also has an ecnonomic multiplier effect. There's also usually contaminant clean up, noise control add ons and limit space.

This was supposed to be a very basic add on that piggybacks on top of the rail bridge structural costs. It now appears to be its own detached bridge. It's that choice that drove up the cost and complication of the project.

[Anonymous]

https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see this type of driver behavior all.the.time.

But sure, its the bikes that are dangerous

The cyclist is traveling in the left lane at a rate of speed 1/3 below the speed limit and normal flow of traffic. The car made a pass that provided a safe distance between the cyclist and the vehicle. The cyclist complains that the pass was made over double yellow, okay, but the cyclist continues to travel in the left lane as a slower moving vehicle, demonstrating that they were determined not to let anyone pass them. It’s also funny to see cyclist claim they stopped at red light, when it looks like they are illegally in the crosswalk and the spedometer says 4 MPH, indicating that they are still moving and not actually stopped.

I don't know the cyclist, perhaps they were getting ready to turn left.

Either way, the cyclist has the right to ride in the lane and it is illegal for the driver to cross the double yellow line.

So you are wrong on both counts.

There is no blanket prohibition for crossing a double yellow line in DC. However, the cyclist has recorded themselves committing at least one clear traffic violation.

I've been looking this up and cannot find a reference in the DC regulations to the double yellow line. This is of course covered in the DC Driver Manual and we all know it is illegal, but what specific regulation does it violate?

There is not a specific bright line rule because the law intentionally allows for situations like what the cyclist depicted. Needing to cross for safety reasons while also complying with other laws.

Blowing past a cyclist is not "safety reasons" - that is just being selfish and operating the SUV in question very dangerously.

Cyclists are the least law abiding people on the road. They don't even follow the rules of "Idaho stops," a rule they wanted. They're only allowed to blow stop signs if no one else has the right of way at an intersection.

This really is focusing on the speck in another's eye while ignoring planks in your own territory. Drivers really are completely blind to their own illegal behavior. Speeding is the most obvious, and dangerous one, but the vast majority of drivers at any given point in time are violating one or more laws. Illegal driver behavior is so ingrained it doesn't even feel illegal to most drivers.

Not to mention that drivers enjoy the privilege of being ensconced in a multi-ton steel cage that not only insulates them from the consequences of their own reckless behavior but socializes the adverse effects thereof across all manner of surrounding road users. False equivalences between driver and cyclist behavior are one of the dumbest tropes to be found on the whole internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The federal grant will cover about 23 percent of the pedestrian crossing’s cost, estimated at about $88 million, according to the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority, which is overseeing the project."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/08/11/dc-infrastructure-projects-federal-grants/

$88 million? For a bike bridge? Why are we gold plating this thing?

A more recent article said $52 million. And of that, the fed are paying over $50 million of it, with DC (350k) and VA (the balance) the rest.

And another article says it's two bike bridges.

If the federal government is paying for it that's great because it seems very extravagent. But either way, why is it so damn expensive?

Where did you just arrive from? Building and maintaining any infrastructure is insanely expensive in this part of the world. The amounts being put into rehabilitating the Northeast Rail Corridor are eye-watering. Googling will take you to a few good articles that explain why.

Context: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/1/27/how-much-does-a-mile-of-road-actually-cost
Keep in mind those numbers are from 2014, so you need to add about 40% for construction inflation.

This bridge is about as expensive as building one mile of collector road.

It's the road equivalent of flat rural basic road, which is much cheaper, and it's only a mile.

If the feds are paying than whatever but it doesn't make sense economically and is over complicated. They should have just built a new 4 rail bridge and converted the old one into a pedestrian/bike path but I assume they didn't do that because the old rail bridge is privately owned.