Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

Having commuted downtown for decades along GA or CT Ave, I can report cyclists are few and far between. The reality is there are very few people who commute by bikes. What on earth makes decisionmakers believe the masses will purchase bikes and all of a sudden be physically equipped to ride a bike to work???

I have not one, but two, colleagues who are longtime cyclists (think: travel abroad for cycling vacations). As they aged, they got wobbly and accident prone as is backed up by research. Long story short: both suffered serious accidents commuting to work in DC. These were people who commuted to work by bike for several decades. Both ended up in the hospital. Cars weren't involved...age was a factor.

I'm curious just how many bikes are envisioned for this new plan? If I see 2 or 3 people on bikes during my 90 minute rush hour commute down CT Ave,are the new lanes for them...for those 3 people? Or are you imagining dozens of people? Hundreds?

This is a delusional plan that will create accidents and gridlock.

Why didn't they redesign side streets to create safer bike lanes instead of creating more traffic on CT Ave?

And can somebody for the love of God please do something about Rosemary's seating in the street??? There is a daily back-up created by the merge that typically lasts 20 mins starting several blocks north. Why on earth haven't they cleared it up?

It won't. It will make the road safer for everyone, including bicyclists. If you want to drive to work instead of taking Metro, go ahead, don't take Metro, keep driving, nobody is stopping you. But there is no reason why DC should design its streets to prioritize your car-commuting convenience.

(Why don't you drive on side streets instead of on CT Ave?)

Shouldn’t urban design—particularly main arteries—contemplate commuters?

The obvious answer is yes.

Why?

Traffic and safety on CT Ave impacts residents as well as businesses that employ or cater to commuters. And, residents commute via CT Ave.

It’s silly to counter a post by telling one person to suck it if they opt to drive. As if thousands of other commuters don’t exist.

I cannot imagine why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

The obvious answer is no, urban design should not prioritize car commuters.

What's more, prioritizing car commuters worsens both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue, and de-prioritizing car commuters will improve both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue.

You have options for commuting. You choose to drive. If conditions change, for example driving becomes less convenient compared to other modes, you might choose to take one of the other modes instead. Or you might not - you might choose to continue to drive despite the inconvenience. Those choices are up to you.

^^^

That’s the mindset that will destroy the city.

And it’s a baffling one.

Presumably you are progressive, no?

As a progressive, you should contemplate the entire community…not just your own personal agenda.

When everyone eventually realizes this was a colossal mistake, we can resurrect this thread and do the Church Lady’s “told ya so” dance.

Your personal agenda is a convenient drive to work from the Maryland exurbs to your job in DC.

From a community standpoint, we in the US have prioritized that personal agenda since the 1950s. It destroyed cities, literally. Time to do something different.

Not true.

There are myriad reasons why some cities declined. There is rather interesting research that centers on the mass exodus to suburbs (including DC to the burbs), but it’s far more complex than cars and commuting.

Regardless, DC resolved the mass exodus issue as evidenced by rampant gentrification and continued housing development.

Is your hope that the addition of unnecessary bike lanes (given the documented lack of cyclists in any meaningful number) will…what, exactly?

Prompt people to buy bikes, spandex, locks, etc. and develop the stamina and extra time needed to change their commute…regardless of weather, where they live and work, etc.? And what does success look like using your measure?

Or is the goal to frustrate car commuters to the point of quitting?

None of this makes sense.

I predict accidents involving buses. We already see them, and we will see more.

Literally true.

But if your initial premise is "the bike lanes are unnecessary," then it's not surprising when you arrive at a conclusion of "the bike lanes are unnecessary."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

Having commuted downtown for decades along GA or CT Ave, I can report cyclists are few and far between. The reality is there are very few people who commute by bikes. What on earth makes decisionmakers believe the masses will purchase bikes and all of a sudden be physically equipped to ride a bike to work???

I have not one, but two, colleagues who are longtime cyclists (think: travel abroad for cycling vacations). As they aged, they got wobbly and accident prone as is backed up by research. Long story short: both suffered serious accidents commuting to work in DC. These were people who commuted to work by bike for several decades. Both ended up in the hospital. Cars weren't involved...age was a factor.

I'm curious just how many bikes are envisioned for this new plan? If I see 2 or 3 people on bikes during my 90 minute rush hour commute down CT Ave,are the new lanes for them...for those 3 people? Or are you imagining dozens of people? Hundreds?

This is a delusional plan that will create accidents and gridlock.

Why didn't they redesign side streets to create safer bike lanes instead of creating more traffic on CT Ave?

And can somebody for the love of God please do something about Rosemary's seating in the street??? There is a daily back-up created by the merge that typically lasts 20 mins starting several blocks north. Why on earth haven't they cleared it up?

It won't. It will make the road safer for everyone, including bicyclists. If you want to drive to work instead of taking Metro, go ahead, don't take Metro, keep driving, nobody is stopping you. But there is no reason why DC should design its streets to prioritize your car-commuting convenience.

(Why don't you drive on side streets instead of on CT Ave?)

Shouldn’t urban design—particularly main arteries—contemplate commuters?

The obvious answer is yes.

Why?

Traffic and safety on CT Ave impacts residents as well as businesses that employ or cater to commuters. And, residents commute via CT Ave.

It’s silly to counter a post by telling one person to suck it if they opt to drive. As if thousands of other commuters don’t exist.

I cannot imagine why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

The obvious answer is no, urban design should not prioritize car commuters.

What's more, prioritizing car commuters worsens both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue, and de-prioritizing car commuters will improve both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue.

You have options for commuting. You choose to drive. If conditions change, for example driving becomes less convenient compared to other modes, you might choose to take one of the other modes instead. Or you might not - you might choose to continue to drive despite the inconvenience. Those choices are up to you.

^^^

That’s the mindset that will destroy the city.

And it’s a baffling one.

Presumably you are progressive, no?

As a progressive, you should contemplate the entire community…not just your own personal agenda.

When everyone eventually realizes this was a colossal mistake, we can resurrect this thread and do the Church Lady’s “told ya so” dance.

Your personal agenda is a convenient drive to work from the Maryland exurbs to your job in DC.

From a community standpoint, we in the US have prioritized that personal agenda since the 1950s. It destroyed cities, literally. Time to do something different.

Not true.

There are myriad reasons why some cities declined. There is rather interesting research that centers on the mass exodus to suburbs (including DC to the burbs), but it’s far more complex than cars and commuting.

Regardless, DC resolved the mass exodus issue as evidenced by rampant gentrification and continued housing development.

Is your hope that the addition of unnecessary bike lanes (given the documented lack of cyclists in any meaningful number) will…what, exactly?

Prompt people to buy bikes, spandex, locks, etc. and develop the stamina and extra time needed to change their commute…regardless of weather, where they live and work, etc.? And what does success look like using your measure?

Or is the goal to frustrate car commuters to the point of quitting?

None of this makes sense.

I predict accidents involving buses. We already see them, and we will see more.

Literally true.

But if your initial premise is "the bike lanes are unnecessary," then it's not surprising when you arrive at a conclusion of "the bike lanes are unnecessary."

Sigh.

I’ve spent a decent amount of time studying gentrification which required poring over history and more recent studies related to urban/suburban flight, white flight, etc.

I’m from this area and I’m pushing 50, so I lived through some of it and my parents and grandparents certainly did (in both DC and Baltimore, noting interesting comparisons and contrasts).

You are dramatically oversimplifying why bedroom communities and suburbs developed. Hint: it wasn’t just cars.

Regardless, DC no longer suffers from under-population. (As if!)

Vacancies in new-builds is different than under-population (which I believe is the singular issue you are pointing to when saying car commuting is bad and singularly focused urban planning). ICYMI: the metro was an effective way to address transportation issues for the masses as opposed to a select few.

Have you read the studies documenting the dangers of bike lanes—including studies on DC’s bike lanes? In short: not good…and certainly makes one wonder why they are opting to create more danger on one of DC’s most congested roads.

Baffling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

Having commuted downtown for decades along GA or CT Ave, I can report cyclists are few and far between. The reality is there are very few people who commute by bikes. What on earth makes decisionmakers believe the masses will purchase bikes and all of a sudden be physically equipped to ride a bike to work???

I have not one, but two, colleagues who are longtime cyclists (think: travel abroad for cycling vacations). As they aged, they got wobbly and accident prone as is backed up by research. Long story short: both suffered serious accidents commuting to work in DC. These were people who commuted to work by bike for several decades. Both ended up in the hospital. Cars weren't involved...age was a factor.

I'm curious just how many bikes are envisioned for this new plan? If I see 2 or 3 people on bikes during my 90 minute rush hour commute down CT Ave,are the new lanes for them...for those 3 people? Or are you imagining dozens of people? Hundreds?

This is a delusional plan that will create accidents and gridlock.

Why didn't they redesign side streets to create safer bike lanes instead of creating more traffic on CT Ave?

And can somebody for the love of God please do something about Rosemary's seating in the street??? There is a daily back-up created by the merge that typically lasts 20 mins starting several blocks north. Why on earth haven't they cleared it up?

It won't. It will make the road safer for everyone, including bicyclists. If you want to drive to work instead of taking Metro, go ahead, don't take Metro, keep driving, nobody is stopping you. But there is no reason why DC should design its streets to prioritize your car-commuting convenience.

(Why don't you drive on side streets instead of on CT Ave?)

Shouldn’t urban design—particularly main arteries—contemplate commuters?

The obvious answer is yes.

Why?

Traffic and safety on CT Ave impacts residents as well as businesses that employ or cater to commuters. And, residents commute via CT Ave.

It’s silly to counter a post by telling one person to suck it if they opt to drive. As if thousands of other commuters don’t exist.

I cannot imagine why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

The obvious answer is no, urban design should not prioritize car commuters.

What's more, prioritizing car commuters worsens both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue, and de-prioritizing car commuters will improve both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue.

You have options for commuting. You choose to drive. If conditions change, for example driving becomes less convenient compared to other modes, you might choose to take one of the other modes instead. Or you might not - you might choose to continue to drive despite the inconvenience. Those choices are up to you.

^^^

That’s the mindset that will destroy the city.

And it’s a baffling one.

Presumably you are progressive, no?

As a progressive, you should contemplate the entire community…not just your own personal agenda.

When everyone eventually realizes this was a colossal mistake, we can resurrect this thread and do the Church Lady’s “told ya so” dance.

Your personal agenda is a convenient drive to work from the Maryland exurbs to your job in DC.

From a community standpoint, we in the US have prioritized that personal agenda since the 1950s. It destroyed cities, literally. Time to do something different.

Not true.

There are myriad reasons why some cities declined. There is rather interesting research that centers on the mass exodus to suburbs (including DC to the burbs), but it’s far more complex than cars and commuting.

Regardless, DC resolved the mass exodus issue as evidenced by rampant gentrification and continued housing development.

Is your hope that the addition of unnecessary bike lanes (given the documented lack of cyclists in any meaningful number) will…what, exactly?

Prompt people to buy bikes, spandex, locks, etc. and develop the stamina and extra time needed to change their commute…regardless of weather, where they live and work, etc.? And what does success look like using your measure?

Or is the goal to frustrate car commuters to the point of quitting?

None of this makes sense.

I predict accidents involving buses. We already see them, and we will see more.

Literally true.

But if your initial premise is "the bike lanes are unnecessary," then it's not surprising when you arrive at a conclusion of "the bike lanes are unnecessary."

Sigh.

I’ve spent a decent amount of time studying gentrification which required poring over history and more recent studies related to urban/suburban flight, white flight, etc.

I’m from this area and I’m pushing 50, so I lived through some of it and my parents and grandparents certainly did (in both DC and Baltimore, noting interesting comparisons and contrasts).

You are dramatically oversimplifying why bedroom communities and suburbs developed. Hint: it wasn’t just cars.

Regardless, DC no longer suffers from under-population. (As if!)

Vacancies in new-builds is different than under-population (which I believe is the singular issue you are pointing to when saying car commuting is bad and singularly focused urban planning). ICYMI: the metro was an effective way to address transportation issues for the masses as opposed to a select few.

Have you read the studies documenting the dangers of bike lanes—including studies on DC’s bike lanes? In short: not good…and certainly makes one wonder why they are opting to create more danger on one of DC’s most congested roads.

Baffling.

The what now? Good bike lanes make the roads safer for everyone.

Highways for car commuting from the suburbs literally destroyed cities. When I say literally, I mean literally. Highways where there used to be buildings and people. Parking lots where there used to be buildings and people. If you've spent a decent amount of time studying this, then this is something you should know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

Having commuted downtown for decades along GA or CT Ave, I can report cyclists are few and far between. The reality is there are very few people who commute by bikes. What on earth makes decisionmakers believe the masses will purchase bikes and all of a sudden be physically equipped to ride a bike to work???

I have not one, but two, colleagues who are longtime cyclists (think: travel abroad for cycling vacations). As they aged, they got wobbly and accident prone as is backed up by research. Long story short: both suffered serious accidents commuting to work in DC. These were people who commuted to work by bike for several decades. Both ended up in the hospital. Cars weren't involved...age was a factor.

I'm curious just how many bikes are envisioned for this new plan? If I see 2 or 3 people on bikes during my 90 minute rush hour commute down CT Ave,are the new lanes for them...for those 3 people? Or are you imagining dozens of people? Hundreds?

This is a delusional plan that will create accidents and gridlock.

Why didn't they redesign side streets to create safer bike lanes instead of creating more traffic on CT Ave?

And can somebody for the love of God please do something about Rosemary's seating in the street??? There is a daily back-up created by the merge that typically lasts 20 mins starting several blocks north. Why on earth haven't they cleared it up?

It won't. It will make the road safer for everyone, including bicyclists. If you want to drive to work instead of taking Metro, go ahead, don't take Metro, keep driving, nobody is stopping you. But there is no reason why DC should design its streets to prioritize your car-commuting convenience.

(Why don't you drive on side streets instead of on CT Ave?)

Shouldn’t urban design—particularly main arteries—contemplate commuters?

The obvious answer is yes.

Why?

Traffic and safety on CT Ave impacts residents as well as businesses that employ or cater to commuters. And, residents commute via CT Ave.

It’s silly to counter a post by telling one person to suck it if they opt to drive. As if thousands of other commuters don’t exist.

I cannot imagine why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

The obvious answer is no, urban design should not prioritize car commuters.

What's more, prioritizing car commuters worsens both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue, and de-prioritizing car commuters will improve both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue.

You have options for commuting. You choose to drive. If conditions change, for example driving becomes less convenient compared to other modes, you might choose to take one of the other modes instead. Or you might not - you might choose to continue to drive despite the inconvenience. Those choices are up to you.

^^^

That’s the mindset that will destroy the city.

And it’s a baffling one.

Presumably you are progressive, no?

As a progressive, you should contemplate the entire community…not just your own personal agenda.

When everyone eventually realizes this was a colossal mistake, we can resurrect this thread and do the Church Lady’s “told ya so” dance.

Your personal agenda is a convenient drive to work from the Maryland exurbs to your job in DC.

From a community standpoint, we in the US have prioritized that personal agenda since the 1950s. It destroyed cities, literally. Time to do something different.

Not true.

There are myriad reasons why some cities declined. There is rather interesting research that centers on the mass exodus to suburbs (including DC to the burbs), but it’s far more complex than cars and commuting.

Regardless, DC resolved the mass exodus issue as evidenced by rampant gentrification and continued housing development.

Is your hope that the addition of unnecessary bike lanes (given the documented lack of cyclists in any meaningful number) will…what, exactly?

Prompt people to buy bikes, spandex, locks, etc. and develop the stamina and extra time needed to change their commute…regardless of weather, where they live and work, etc.? And what does success look like using your measure?

Or is the goal to frustrate car commuters to the point of quitting?

None of this makes sense.

I predict accidents involving buses. We already see them, and we will see more.

Literally true.

But if your initial premise is "the bike lanes are unnecessary," then it's not surprising when you arrive at a conclusion of "the bike lanes are unnecessary."

Sigh.

I’ve spent a decent amount of time studying gentrification which required poring over history and more recent studies related to urban/suburban flight, white flight, etc.

I’m from this area and I’m pushing 50, so I lived through some of it and my parents and grandparents certainly did (in both DC and Baltimore, noting interesting comparisons and contrasts).

You are dramatically oversimplifying why bedroom communities and suburbs developed. Hint: it wasn’t just cars.

Regardless, DC no longer suffers from under-population. (As if!)

Vacancies in new-builds is different than under-population (which I believe is the singular issue you are pointing to when saying car commuting is bad and singularly focused urban planning). ICYMI: the metro was an effective way to address transportation issues for the masses as opposed to a select few.

Have you read the studies documenting the dangers of bike lanes—including studies on DC’s bike lanes? In short: not good…and certainly makes one wonder why they are opting to create more danger on one of DC’s most congested roads.

Baffling.

The what now? Good bike lanes make the roads safer for everyone.

Highways for car commuting from the suburbs literally destroyed cities. When I say literally, I mean literally. Highways where there used to be buildings and people. Parking lots where there used to be buildings and people. If you've spent a decent amount of time studying this, then this is something you should know.

You’re moving the needle with highways.

We are talking about CT Ave.

Re: dc’s dangerous bike lines that have been highlighted in several studies as well as articles in the NYT and Forbes - In short, they provide a false sense of safety to the cyclists and the end result is accidents with both pedestrians and cars—typically not at intersections.

Google it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

So keep driving. And if it ever becomes less fast and/or more expensive than Metro, then you can either reconsider your choice and take Metro instead, or you can choose to keep driving. It's up to you. But to expect DC to design their streets around your desire for a fast, cheap, and convenient drive? Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

Having commuted downtown for decades along GA or CT Ave, I can report cyclists are few and far between. The reality is there are very few people who commute by bikes. What on earth makes decisionmakers believe the masses will purchase bikes and all of a sudden be physically equipped to ride a bike to work???

I have not one, but two, colleagues who are longtime cyclists (think: travel abroad for cycling vacations). As they aged, they got wobbly and accident prone as is backed up by research. Long story short: both suffered serious accidents commuting to work in DC. These were people who commuted to work by bike for several decades. Both ended up in the hospital. Cars weren't involved...age was a factor.

I'm curious just how many bikes are envisioned for this new plan? If I see 2 or 3 people on bikes during my 90 minute rush hour commute down CT Ave,are the new lanes for them...for those 3 people? Or are you imagining dozens of people? Hundreds?

This is a delusional plan that will create accidents and gridlock.

Why didn't they redesign side streets to create safer bike lanes instead of creating more traffic on CT Ave?

And can somebody for the love of God please do something about Rosemary's seating in the street??? There is a daily back-up created by the merge that typically lasts 20 mins starting several blocks north. Why on earth haven't they cleared it up?

It won't. It will make the road safer for everyone, including bicyclists. If you want to drive to work instead of taking Metro, go ahead, don't take Metro, keep driving, nobody is stopping you. But there is no reason why DC should design its streets to prioritize your car-commuting convenience.

(Why don't you drive on side streets instead of on CT Ave?)

Shouldn’t urban design—particularly main arteries—contemplate commuters?

The obvious answer is yes.

Why?

Traffic and safety on CT Ave impacts residents as well as businesses that employ or cater to commuters. And, residents commute via CT Ave.

It’s silly to counter a post by telling one person to suck it if they opt to drive. As if thousands of other commuters don’t exist.

I cannot imagine why anyone thinks this is a good idea.

The obvious answer is no, urban design should not prioritize car commuters.

What's more, prioritizing car commuters worsens both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue, and de-prioritizing car commuters will improve both traffic and safety on Connecticut Avenue.

You have options for commuting. You choose to drive. If conditions change, for example driving becomes less convenient compared to other modes, you might choose to take one of the other modes instead. Or you might not - you might choose to continue to drive despite the inconvenience. Those choices are up to you.

^^^

That’s the mindset that will destroy the city.

And it’s a baffling one.

Presumably you are progressive, no?

As a progressive, you should contemplate the entire community…not just your own personal agenda.

When everyone eventually realizes this was a colossal mistake, we can resurrect this thread and do the Church Lady’s “told ya so” dance.

Your personal agenda is a convenient drive to work from the Maryland exurbs to your job in DC.

From a community standpoint, we in the US have prioritized that personal agenda since the 1950s. It destroyed cities, literally. Time to do something different.

Not true.

There are myriad reasons why some cities declined. There is rather interesting research that centers on the mass exodus to suburbs (including DC to the burbs), but it’s far more complex than cars and commuting.

Regardless, DC resolved the mass exodus issue as evidenced by rampant gentrification and continued housing development.

Is your hope that the addition of unnecessary bike lanes (given the documented lack of cyclists in any meaningful number) will…what, exactly?

Prompt people to buy bikes, spandex, locks, etc. and develop the stamina and extra time needed to change their commute…regardless of weather, where they live and work, etc.? And what does success look like using your measure?

Or is the goal to frustrate car commuters to the point of quitting?

None of this makes sense.

I predict accidents involving buses. We already see them, and we will see more.

Literally true.

But if your initial premise is "the bike lanes are unnecessary," then it's not surprising when you arrive at a conclusion of "the bike lanes are unnecessary."

Sigh.

I’ve spent a decent amount of time studying gentrification which required poring over history and more recent studies related to urban/suburban flight, white flight, etc.

I’m from this area and I’m pushing 50, so I lived through some of it and my parents and grandparents certainly did (in both DC and Baltimore, noting interesting comparisons and contrasts).

You are dramatically oversimplifying why bedroom communities and suburbs developed. Hint: it wasn’t just cars.

Regardless, DC no longer suffers from under-population. (As if!)

Vacancies in new-builds is different than under-population (which I believe is the singular issue you are pointing to when saying car commuting is bad and singularly focused urban planning). ICYMI: the metro was an effective way to address transportation issues for the masses as opposed to a select few.

Have you read the studies documenting the dangers of bike lanes—including studies on DC’s bike lanes? In short: not good…and certainly makes one wonder why they are opting to create more danger on one of DC’s most congested roads.

Baffling.

The what now? Good bike lanes make the roads safer for everyone.

Highways for car commuting from the suburbs literally destroyed cities. When I say literally, I mean literally. Highways where there used to be buildings and people. Parking lots where there used to be buildings and people. If you've spent a decent amount of time studying this, then this is something you should know.

You’re moving the needle with highways.

We are talking about CT Ave.

Re: dc’s dangerous bike lines that have been highlighted in several studies as well as articles in the NYT and Forbes - In short, they provide a false sense of safety to the cyclists and the end result is accidents with both pedestrians and cars—typically not at intersections.

Google it.

Oh, you're referring to the opinion pieces by people (often funded by the oil industry) who cite outmoded philosophies about "vehicular cycling" from the 1970s as an argument against well-designed, safe, convenient bike lanes. Yeah, no. Actual reality shows that bike lanes make roads safer for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

LOL. Okay. Driving in the DMV is safer than metro. Riiiiiiiight. God this thread needs to be burned to the ground. The amount of drivel and made up shit in it is out of control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

LOL. Okay. Driving in the DMV is safer than metro. Riiiiiiiight. God this thread needs to be burned to the ground. The amount of drivel and made up shit in it is out of control.

A relative was beaten up and robbed just as the train pulled into glenmont. The metro police said it happens a lot. Their suggestion was to get off earlier (like Forest Glen) or drive.

A colleague was beaten up and mugged at 4pm—daylight—approaching TP station on the train. The kids ran off as the doors opened.

I could go on with stories from people I know IRL.

By contrast, I don’t know anyone IRL who has suffered bodily harm and property loss in a car. I know data would predict otherwise, but data doesn’t impact my current reality.

Plus: germs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

So keep driving. And if it ever becomes less fast and/or more expensive than Metro, then you can either reconsider your choice and take Metro instead, or you can choose to keep driving. It's up to you. But to expect DC to design their streets around your desire for a fast, cheap, and convenient drive? Nope.

Riiiiiiight…because it makes far more sense to bend over backwards to create something for the (on average) 3 people on bikes on CT Ave at any given time.

Based on the lack of actual cyclists, they could probably use the sidewalk without any issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

LOL. Okay. Driving in the DMV is safer than metro. Riiiiiiiight. God this thread needs to be burned to the ground. The amount of drivel and made up shit in it is out of control.

A relative was beaten up and robbed just as the train pulled into glenmont. The metro police said it happens a lot. Their suggestion was to get off earlier (like Forest Glen) or drive.

A colleague was beaten up and mugged at 4pm—daylight—approaching TP station on the train. The kids ran off as the doors opened.

I could go on with stories from people I know IRL.

By contrast, I don’t know anyone IRL who has suffered bodily harm and property loss in a car. I know data would predict otherwise, but data doesn’t impact my current reality.

Plus: germs.

Your current reality is literally impossible. It is impossible to be an adult in the US and know zero people who have been in a property-damage car crash. In fact, I think it's impossible to be an adult in the US and know zero people who have been killed in a car crash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing DC to Copenhagen is ridiculous.

They ride bikes because they live in the city and/or can’t afford cars. They have never been reliant on cars the way Americans are. We can’t flip a switch and change. Plus, people commute downtown via CT Ave from far flung burbs. Simply put: they cannot ride a bike 20+ miles to work.

I’m curious who will be the fall guy/sacrificial lamb when this fiasco becomes national news.

PS - Anyone figured out yet why Rosemary’s has outdoor seating in the street on CT Ave? Anyone else sick of sitting in traffic along that stretch as lanes merge?

I’m predicting an accident with a metro bus as it struggles to merge. I witness near misses all the time.

No, but we can change gradually by building more bike infrastructure.

Also, nobody is insisting that people ride a bike 20+ miles to work (though this actually can be done). There is an entire Metro system built with the purpose of getting people from far flung burbs to jobs downtown.

Speaking of the far flung burbs, remember when people along Old Georgetown Road insisted that the bike lanes were catastrophically dangerous, and then it turned out that the bike lanes actually made the road safer?

I don't think you realize how many people commute from Montgomery County and beyond. I've been commuting downtown for 25 years. I do not live near metro...lots of people live far from the end of the lines in Shady Grove or (crime ridden) Glenmont. Nobody is driving 30 mins to metro, paying to park, then paying to ride metro. Ridership is down dramatically from when I used to metro downtown. It's cheaper and easier to drive and park downtown. It's also safer.

There is no way it's safer to drive 30-40 minutes each way every day than it is to Metro. Your chances of being injured in a car accident are significantly higher than your chances of being mugged or otherwise injured on Metro.

I won’t dispute the safety stats which I realize are true.

But if you are trying to alter people’s behavior, you must address their perception…whether real or imagined.

Fact: I more easily caught germs on metro than in my own car…and that was prior to covid.

Fact: I have friends, family, and colleagues who were mugged and/or assaulted on metro. Go ride the red line to glenmont alone at night and let me know how safe you feel between Wheaton and Glenmont when the cars are nearly empty. That’s when the crime starts. Ask anyone from law enforcement or metro. PS - The metro staff are so accustomed to it that they aren’t inclined to call police, and police aren’t inclined to take down a report.

So, yeah. I feel safer driving in my car. Plus, it’s faster and less expensive.

So keep driving. And if it ever becomes less fast and/or more expensive than Metro, then you can either reconsider your choice and take Metro instead, or you can choose to keep driving. It's up to you. But to expect DC to design their streets around your desire for a fast, cheap, and convenient drive? Nope.

Riiiiiiight…because it makes far more sense to bend over backwards to create something for the (on average) 3 people on bikes on CT Ave at any given time.

Based on the lack of actual cyclists, they could probably use the sidewalk without any issues.

Oh, this again. Factually incorrect, bad public policy, and boring.

[Anonymous]

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/24356/dot_24356_DS1.pdf?

According to the study commissioned by the government (not oil companies), bicyclists in DC are overwhelmingly affluent, young, white men.

^^^^^
No wonder the agenda is being pushed forward!

I’d rather see investment in addressing the myriad other issues plaguing the city than a pet project for a teeny tiny subset of rich white guys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/24356/dot_24356_DS1.pdf?

According to the study commissioned by the government (not oil companies), bicyclists in DC are overwhelmingly affluent, young, white men.

^^^^^
No wonder the agenda is being pushed forward!

I’d rather see investment in addressing the myriad other issues plaguing the city than a pet project for a teeny tiny subset of rich white guys.

Gentle suggestion: someone might want to launch a Twitter storm on that data point and ask DC officials why they are catering to that subpopulation.