D.C. needs to get a lot more car friendly

[Anonymous]

On second thought, the Wharf is a luxury zone for the ultra wealthy. If that's your measure of success then that's where we'll disagree. It's not relevant to 99% of what DC needs to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess it's good to know that drivers demands are pretty radical and unreasonable. Usually they aren't this honest.

What demands? The Wharf is a wildly successful pedestrian zone and it’s located conveniently close to an interstate highway and includes abundant car parking. These things are all related. There’s no demand. The developer clearly took this into account before investing.

Just closing down streets to pedestrianize them will not produce these kinds of results and the research and literature on this presents a number of explanations. Successful pedestrian malls remain the exception.

I don't care too much about the Wharf. What about the rest of DC? You want to make it a drive through full of interstates?

Where have I said that? You are projecting.

It’s quite bizarre to hate successful and beautiful urbanism that is an asset to the city because you have some utopian ideal that neither it, nor frankly anywhere else can meet.

What I have explained to you, based on a well established base of academic research based on decades of data and the experience of our community, are the conditions that help to make pedestrian zones successful.

Otherwise, and this is the data and urban planners talking, if you just drop pedestrian zones in areas without those conditions they turn into dead zones and most of them end up being reverted back to normal streets.

So the conclusion is that if you want vibrant urbanism, the main precondition is the motivation for people from outside that area to go there and spend their money and then go back home and the reality is that convenience is a big factor in that. The flip side of that is if you are intent on economically harming the business in your neighborhood that make it vibrant, make it inconvenient.

The interesting thing you will discover if you do the reading is that the typical trajectory of these pedestrization efforts follow the same pattern: initial success that tapers away over time until it becomes overwhelmingly obvious.

I’m a big fan of the Santa Monica 3rd Street Promenade. I was last in LA in 2019 and it’s a really nice place but even then a significant portion of the storefronts were closed. I’m reading that now since COVID, when you would think that such an amenity would be even more important, it now has 40% empty storefronts. Santa Monica has the same population density as DC and there’s a beach just a couple blocks away (the pier on the other hand is always super popular). The problem there and in Santa Monica generally is a lack of parking. People in LA just prefer to go elsewhere like Silver Lake or West Hollywood where parking is more plentiful.

You need to come to some senses that this utopian DC that you want is not possible the way you want it and in fact, the policies you want to bring about this utopian vision will actually hasten the city’s demise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On second thought, the Wharf is a luxury zone for the ultra wealthy. If that's your measure of success then that's where we'll disagree. It's not relevant to 99% of what DC needs to do.

It’s odd that you think a high quality public amenities that is the envy of other cities is actually bad! If you want to live in a crappy city, I am sure there are plenty in Ohio that you could choose from.

[Anonymous]

I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

That’s funny because Parisians don’t sound thrilled with cyclists.

The New York Times:


PARIS — On a recent afternoon, the Rue de Rivoli looked like this: Cyclists blowing through red lights in two directions. Delivery bike riders fixating on their cellphones. Electric scooters careening across lanes. Jaywalkers and nervous pedestrians scrambling as if in a video game.

Sarah Famery, a 20-year resident of the Marais neighborhood, braced for the tumult. She looked left, then right, then left and right again before venturing into a crosswalk, only to break into a rant-laden sprint as two cyclists came within inches of grazing her.

“It’s chaos!” exclaimed Ms. Famery, shaking a fist at the swarm of bikes that have displaced cars on the Rue de Rivoli ever since it was remade into a multilane highway for cyclists last year. “Politicians want to make Paris a cycling city, but no one is following any rules,” she said. “It’s becoming risky just to cross the street!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

What are you talking about? Now you are changing the subject. If you want to discuss the viability of affluent enclaves disconnected from highways or even transit, you don’t need to look farther than Georgetown. The affluent areas outside of the tourist zones of European cities are very similar to the Georgetown East Village. You will find similar elevated or buried primary arterial roads similar to Canal and the Whitehurst. You will also find a very un-dynamic street scene with few shops that mainly cater to an older crowd, many have been there for decades.

But I am sure that you’re not thinking of the 16th Arrondissement, because you’ve probably never been there and that’s the point. You are probably instead thinking about the Left Bank and Montparnasse in the 6th. And while you will find some pedestrianized streets in those areas, as I have already explained, what keeps those areas economically viable is because people come from outside to spend their money. These people are mostly tourists, just like those walking at the pedestrianize areas of the National Mall. The 16th is not pedestrianized.

Again, we are welcome to educate yourself or you can stay ignorant. It’s up to you.
The affluent areas that you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

What are you talking about? Now you are changing the subject. If you want to discuss the viability of affluent enclaves disconnected from highways or even transit, you don’t need to look farther than Georgetown. The affluent areas outside of the tourist zones of European cities are very similar to the Georgetown East Village. You will find similar elevated or buried primary arterial roads similar to Canal and the Whitehurst. You will also find a very un-dynamic street scene with few shops that mainly cater to an older crowd, many have been there for decades.

But I am sure that you’re not thinking of the 16th Arrondissement, because you’ve probably never been there and that’s the point. You are probably instead thinking about the Left Bank and Montparnasse in the 6th. And while you will find some pedestrianized streets in those areas, as I have already explained, what keeps those areas economically viable is because people come from outside to spend their money. These people are mostly tourists, just like those walking at the pedestrianize areas of the National Mall. The 16th is not pedestrianized.

Again, we are welcome to educate yourself or you can stay ignorant. It’s up to you.

Just to add that the areas of Paris pedestrianized by Hidalgo that do not draw tourists are suffering with store closures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

That’s funny because Parisians don’t sound thrilled with cyclists.

The New York Times:


PARIS — On a recent afternoon, the Rue de Rivoli looked like this: Cyclists blowing through red lights in two directions. Delivery bike riders fixating on their cellphones. Electric scooters careening across lanes. Jaywalkers and nervous pedestrians scrambling as if in a video game.

Sarah Famery, a 20-year resident of the Marais neighborhood, braced for the tumult. She looked left, then right, then left and right again before venturing into a crosswalk, only to break into a rant-laden sprint as two cyclists came within inches of grazing her.

“It’s chaos!” exclaimed Ms. Famery, shaking a fist at the swarm of bikes that have displaced cars on the Rue de Rivoli ever since it was remade into a multilane highway for cyclists last year. “Politicians want to make Paris a cycling city, but no one is following any rules,” she said. “It’s becoming risky just to cross the street!”

Lol, then why do the pro-bike lane people in paris keep winning re-election? 'Nobody like them' Ha. Parisians just like to complain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

That’s funny because Parisians don’t sound thrilled with cyclists.

The New York Times:


PARIS — On a recent afternoon, the Rue de Rivoli looked like this: Cyclists blowing through red lights in two directions. Delivery bike riders fixating on their cellphones. Electric scooters careening across lanes. Jaywalkers and nervous pedestrians scrambling as if in a video game.

Sarah Famery, a 20-year resident of the Marais neighborhood, braced for the tumult. She looked left, then right, then left and right again before venturing into a crosswalk, only to break into a rant-laden sprint as two cyclists came within inches of grazing her.

“It’s chaos!” exclaimed Ms. Famery, shaking a fist at the swarm of bikes that have displaced cars on the Rue de Rivoli ever since it was remade into a multilane highway for cyclists last year. “Politicians want to make Paris a cycling city, but no one is following any rules,” she said. “It’s becoming risky just to cross the street!”

Lol, then why do the pro-bike lane people in paris keep winning re-election? 'Nobody like them' Ha. Parisians just like to complain.

You communicate like a child which is consistent with your opinions. The idea that the last Parisian election was a referendum on bike lanes is ignorant. Hidalgo won the last election with about only 200k votes (city population 2m) in the second round after only claiming 30% of the vote in the first round in a year with record low turnout. Her party, PS, has held the mayoralty of Paris for the last 20 years.

When she ran for President just last year, she received only 1.7% of the vote in the first round which is the lowest vote for a PS candidate in history. For reference, PS got 28% of the first round vote in 2012. And to make matters worse, she got absolutely embarrassed in Paris only getting 5% of the vote in the first round.

So it’s laughable that you are ignorant enough to think that there is massive public support for what is going on in Paris. I would encourage you to learn more about subjects you are interested in than reading some tweets or something and thinking you’re an expert.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I said I don't care about it. Learn to read.

You don’t care about the very thing you claim to care about. If you care about what it takes to make cities successful I would suggest that you start reading.

You think that a playground for the wealthy is success. I don't. You seem to not understand that different people have different values.

I'd consider a solid bus line down Georgia avenue that provides consistent and reliable service to a large number of people a success.

I just don't care about luxury stores.

“I want walkable pedestrian zones all over the city”

“I don’t care about and prefer to remain ignorant about how to make sure that these walkable pedestrian zones are a long-term success”

You might want to sit this conversation out.

You can’t fool those of us with experience in Paris and Berlin and Amsterdam where you don’t see many interstates serving luxury areas and yet they do just fine for centuries.

That’s funny because Parisians don’t sound thrilled with cyclists.

The New York Times:


PARIS — On a recent afternoon, the Rue de Rivoli looked like this: Cyclists blowing through red lights in two directions. Delivery bike riders fixating on their cellphones. Electric scooters careening across lanes. Jaywalkers and nervous pedestrians scrambling as if in a video game.

Sarah Famery, a 20-year resident of the Marais neighborhood, braced for the tumult. She looked left, then right, then left and right again before venturing into a crosswalk, only to break into a rant-laden sprint as two cyclists came within inches of grazing her.

“It’s chaos!” exclaimed Ms. Famery, shaking a fist at the swarm of bikes that have displaced cars on the Rue de Rivoli ever since it was remade into a multilane highway for cyclists last year. “Politicians want to make Paris a cycling city, but no one is following any rules,” she said. “It’s becoming risky just to cross the street!”

Lol, then why do the pro-bike lane people in paris keep winning re-election? 'Nobody like them' Ha. Parisians just like to complain.

You communicate like a child which is consistent with your opinions. The idea that the last Parisian election was a referendum on bike lanes is ignorant. Hidalgo won the last election with about only 200k votes (city population 2m) in the second round after only claiming 30% of the vote in the first round in a year with record low turnout. Her party, PS, has held the mayoralty of Paris for the last 20 years.

When she ran for President just last year, she received only 1.7% of the vote in the first round which is the lowest vote for a PS candidate in history. For reference, PS got 28% of the first round vote in 2012. And to make matters worse, she got absolutely embarrassed in Paris only getting 5% of the vote in the first round.

So it’s laughable that you are ignorant enough to think that there is massive public support for what is going on in Paris. I would encourage you to learn more about subjects you are interested in than reading some tweets or something and thinking you’re an expert.

On the other hand, the NYT interviewing a few people downtown is a referendum apparently?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think DC needs to be less car friendly and charge cars to enter DC like London. Maryland drivers cut through my neighborhood speeding and ignoring stop signs. F**k commuters!! You have zero respect for Dc residents.

I agree 100%. My kids and I almost get mowed down by these jacka$$es on the regular just trying to get to school, doesn’t matter that we always cross with the walk sign/in the crosswalk the MD drivers have no respect for traffuc laws and would happily run over my kids if it means getting to work 2 minutes faster. F these people I’m so sick of DC bending over backwards to make them happy

As someone who lives near NIH, let me assure you that there is no state monopoly on inconsiderate commuters. I see plenty of DC drivers who exhibit selfish dangerous behavior all the time.

And DC is responsible for funneling commuter traffic onto residential streets. You want to keep commuters off the back streets? Reopen Beach Drive, fine double-parkers who turn main thoroughfares into one-way roads, and bring back the rush hour shift for Connecticut Avenue, and most of us who drive into our DC offices will stay on the arterial roads.

LOL. No. I want you to ride the metro, WFH, or just take a lot longer to drive to your office because you have to do it slowly and safely. I don’t gaf about your convenience, deal with the consequences of your own choice to live far away from where you work. The entitlement and total lack of self awareness is unreal with you people