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:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

As a pedestrian, I’ve never objected to bikes on the sidewalk. Doesn’t bother me at all.

I live on the bottom of a hill and because there is no bike lane on my street and because drivers tend to aggressively speed on my street, bikes / e-bikes regularly sail down the sidewalk at 15-20 mph. Getting hit by one would be catastrophic. Anyone who regularly walks anywhere in DC is all for the bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

The ANC cohort are such social justice bike warriors (“no bike lanes, no safety, no peace”), with their Trumpy Pied Piper calling the tune.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

The ANC cohort are such social justice bike warriors (“no bike lanes, no safety, no peace”), with their Trumpy Pied Piper calling the tune.

who is their Trumpy Pied Piper?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

Whoa friend, you are asking for this anti-biker to think through second order effects of a decision. No way that will happen!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

uh, what? this is bizarre. the laws are the laws, and everyone is supposed to follow them. the rules about when idaho stops are allowed are very specific. it's not just "you can do whatever you feel like."

Speed limits, stop signs, and red lights are also very specific, but routinely ignored by motorists on DC roads as a matter of course. When a staggering proportion of road users flout the law, focusing on those whose behavior poses the absolute least risk to others is, um, bizarre.

Nonsense. If drivers ignored stop signs at the same rate as cyclists, there would be wrecks at every single intersection in the city, every single day.

There were 41 reported car accidents on the most recently available full day of reporting, with possible reports still coming in: https://opendata.dc.gov/datasets/DCGIS::crashes-in-dc/explore

What sort of police/fire/medical resources do you think those accidents consume? That's with current "law abiding" drivers.

Says the cyclist who wants the city to spend $50 million to build him and his friends their own bridge next to a bridge that's already there.

The daytime population of Washington DC is one million. That's a lot of people moving around and accidents are inevitable (that's why we call them accidents!). Everyone who is on the road, regardless of how they are moving about, should expect to be in an accident sooner or later. (The notion that we can engineer away accident is silly).

That said, it would be helpful if we got the police back in the traffic enforcement game (something WABA opposes!). Traffic cameras basically only catch tourists and they give a free pass to people who are driving while high or drunk who are the most dangerous people on the road.

This is the attitude that gets 40,000 Americans killed every year. And yes, you can engineer away the vast majority of those deaths and injuries. You just don't want to try.
Other countries have 1/3rd the fatalities per mile driven, and most of that difference is design.

Next party starts tomorrow at the van ness metro around 6:30

The bike party will be led around by the local ANC with middle fingers extended.

Looks like tens of people had a fun protest ride tonight.

Few hundred. Did you learn to count at the same place you learned to drive and that's why you fail so hard at both?

https://twitter.com/DcSafer/status/1783279454627741937

Hundreds? Is that you Sean Spicer?

There were about 235 people at the start of the ride. We picked up a handful on the way. So hundreds is correct and tens is stupid wrong.

That’s a very specific number, which makes your statement less credible. This is why people don’t believe you.

It's a specific number because I attempted to count. The "about" is because everyone wasn't frozen in place and people were milling around. You can count the number of heads in the photo that was linked earlier and its pretty close to that and was toward the end of the speakers time at the Mayor's building, so some folks had already peeled off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

LOL. If I don’t get what I want no one should get anything is called hostage taking. The bike bros did the same thing on the K Street Transitway. People are pretty tired of this crap and thankfully the ANC doesn’t get to decide, which makes them look foolish because it just shows how much antipathy they have towards everyone else in the community.

Uh no, it's waiting for a change in the Mayoral adminstration to someone who isn't as deeply influenced by declining CRE death rattles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

Whoa friend, you are asking for this anti-biker to think through second order effects of a decision. No way that will happen!

There is only a few dozen bicyclists per day that use Connecticut. Whether they are on the sidewalk or the street makes no difference for safety at all because there aren't enough of them to matter either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

Whoa friend, you are asking for this anti-biker to think through second order effects of a decision. No way that will happen!

There is only a few dozen bicyclists per day that use Connecticut. Whether they are on the sidewalk or the street makes no difference for safety at all because there aren't enough of them to matter either way.

Amazingly, governments have decided to build bridges across swift-flowing rivers even in the absence of people drowning every day while trying to swim across them.

[Anonymous]

Do cyclists have to have insurance like cars do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do cyclists have to have insurance like cars do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

Whoa friend, you are asking for this anti-biker to think through second order effects of a decision. No way that will happen!

There is only a few dozen bicyclists per day that use Connecticut. Whether they are on the sidewalk or the street makes no difference for safety at all because there aren't enough of them to matter either way.

Amazingly, governments have decided to build bridges across swift-flowing rivers even in the absence of people drowning every day while trying to swim across them.

Amazingly, bridges were built where ferry crossings were so your analogy is not only stupid but also fundamentally wrong.

Regardless, there is no safety issue because hardly anyone bikes on Connecticut. You can't have it both ways and we see through your transparent mendacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

You could just not ride a bike. I don't know why the city, and taxpayers, need to make special accommodations for your hobby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

LOL. If I don’t get what I want no one should get anything is called hostage taking. The bike bros did the same thing on the K Street Transitway. People are pretty tired of this crap and thankfully the ANC doesn’t get to decide, which makes them look foolish because it just shows how much antipathy they have towards everyone else in the community.

But that doesn’t stop the ANC-3C gang from sticking their (middle) fingers into everything.

[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:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

Whoa friend, you are asking for this anti-biker to think through second order effects of a decision. No way that will happen!

There is only a few dozen bicyclists per day that use Connecticut. Whether they are on the sidewalk or the street makes no difference for safety at all because there aren't enough of them to matter either way.

Amazingly, governments have decided to build bridges across swift-flowing rivers even in the absence of people drowning every day while trying to swim across them.

Amazingly, bridges were built where ferry crossings were so your analogy is not only stupid but also fundamentally wrong.

Regardless, there is no safety issue because hardly anyone bikes on Connecticut. You can't have it both ways and we see through your transparent mendacity.

There is no use in arguing with them. It is the same talking points over and over again. It is pointless anyway because no one believes them anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Ave bike lanes are dead, folks. Get over it. The District’s budget situation is dire and not even Charles Allen would fund bike lanes over public school needs. On top of that, public opinion is divided. The WABA crowd comes across as selfish whiners.

Option C was the preferred choice until people opposed decided to fight it.

The bike lanes will only be dead when there isn't another recourse. Until then, advocates will show the support for the safety improvements (more signatures in a week than the opponents collected in 2+ years) show where the Mayor and DDOT are wrong and try to ensure there is a safe North-South route on Connecticut Avenue is preserved as is codified in the MoveDC plan (we don't need another plan) and in compliance with both Vision Zero and the DC Sustainability Plan.

If this is your goal, what is this hissy fit supposed to accomplish?

I am not sure why you call it hissy fit.

People are allowed to go for an evening bike ride, are they not?

Hissy fit is pretty accurate, because the behavior is quite similar to a toddler’s temper tantrum.

You didn’t get what you wanted, so you are having a hissy fit to demonstrate your displeasure.

Everyone that has raised a child knows exactly what is going on.

That's a riot coming from the people who obstructed multiple government agencies for 3 years because of a bike lane!

The middle finger ANC group recently voted to hold up any DDOT spending to improve Connecticut Ave safety unless and until DDOT also builds the bike lanes. So it’s not really about safety on Connecticut either.

Without a place for bikes, there isn't safety, because bikers will either need to be on the sidewalk or on the street. Neither pedestrians nor car drivers want bikes in "their" space, so it sort of makes sense.

As a pedestrian, I’ve never objected to bikes on the sidewalk. Doesn’t bother me at all.

I live on the bottom of a hill and because there is no bike lane on my street and because drivers tend to aggressively speed on my street, bikes / e-bikes regularly sail down the sidewalk at 15-20 mph. Getting hit by one would be catastrophic. Anyone who regularly walks anywhere in DC is all for the bike lanes.

How does a bike lane reduce the risk of a cyclist going too fast for conditions down a hill to stop?