Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

More people support the safety changes on CT Ave than oppose it as evidenced by the elections where it was a core issue.

But as always the monied squeaky wheels make the most noise and win out.

Meanwhile, there will still be 2-3 documented car crashes each week with corresponding injuries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More people support the safety changes on CT Ave than oppose it as evidenced by the elections where it was a core issue.

But as always the monied squeaky wheels make the most noise and win out.

Meanwhile, there will still be 2-3 documented car crashes each week with corresponding injuries.

The vast majority of Ward 3 voters do not live along the CT Ave corridor. They just fell in line and voted D like they always do. The bike lanes were a rounding error, if anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tonight

People have been saying for a while that option C is dead. Given the District’s big revenue hole and business and police union opposition to Option C, Bowser would be more politically popular if she simply lit a big bonfire of taxpayer money in the middle of Connecticut Ave than built bike lanes there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight

Imagine thinking that the spineless hack Frumin is gonna swoop in and save anything.

If Bowser is this opposed, that means the development community is also opposed, which means the plan is dead. Bowser also realizes that she will not suffer politically because either she's done after this term or because she (correctly) realizes that a significant portion of the people who would be directly affected by this are opposed to it. The only people who support this are the same Very Online white mediocrities who think crime isn't a big deal.

Perhaps Frumin can pivot to a pickle ball plan for Connecticut Avenue?

[Anonymous]

Buh-buh-buh-bye, bike lanes!

[Anonymous]

Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight

Imagine thinking that the spineless hack Frumin is gonna swoop in and save anything.

If Bowser is this opposed, that means the development community is also opposed, which means the plan is dead. Bowser also realizes that she will not suffer politically because either she's done after this term or because she (correctly) realizes that a significant portion of the people who would be directly affected by this are opposed to it. The only people who support this are the same Very Online white mediocrities who think crime isn't a big deal.

Perhaps Frumin can pivot to a pickle ball plan for Connecticut Avenue?

Bill wasn’t comfortable with bike lanes either.

[Anonymous]

Don’t have much use for Bowser but was struck by the sense of entitlement from the questioner. Popping the popcorn for the upcoming WABA fury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

Here's an idea for W3 WABAs: Focus your bike plans around the schools rather than the commercial districts. If you can turn just a few 6,000 pound SUVs dropping off Larlo into a bike trip, then you'll do more for W3 traffic and safety than any changes on CT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

Here's an idea for W3 WABAs: Focus your bike plans around the schools rather than the commercial districts. If you can turn just a few 6,000 pound SUVs dropping off Larlo into a bike trip, then you'll do more for W3 traffic and safety than any changes on CT.

Excellent point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

Here's an idea for W3 WABAs: Focus your bike plans around the schools rather than the commercial districts. If you can turn just a few 6,000 pound SUVs dropping off Larlo into a bike trip, then you'll do more for W3 traffic and safety than any changes on CT.

The reason why Connecticut Ave is the focus is as much (maybe more) about an urban vision for DC as it is about alternative transportation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

Here's an idea for W3 WABAs: Focus your bike plans around the schools rather than the commercial districts. If you can turn just a few 6,000 pound SUVs dropping off Larlo into a bike trip, then you'll do more for W3 traffic and safety than any changes on CT.

LOL. Most of this crowd doesn’t have kids. They just want to be able to ride their bikes to Nanny’s for boozy trivia nights. If they actually cared about kids they wouldn’t be advocating for a plan that will push 7000 cars per day into the neighborhoods where actual kids ride their bikes.

[Anonymous]

Hot off the press: Option “C” stands for Cancelled.

[Anonymous]

I think after several years of falling for progressive ideas that have destroyed DC and other cities Mayor Bowser is finally saying “Nah, we good” before it’s too late.

-legalized marijuana
-sanctuary cities
-“reimagining” police
-bike lanes (cancelled)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry WABA and bike bros, you’ve finally been Bowsered!

Here's an idea for W3 WABAs: Focus your bike plans around the schools rather than the commercial districts. If you can turn just a few 6,000 pound SUVs dropping off Larlo into a bike trip, then you'll do more for W3 traffic and safety than any changes on CT.

LOL. Most of this crowd doesn’t have kids. They just want to be able to ride their bikes to Nanny’s for boozy trivia nights. If they actually cared about kids they wouldn’t be advocating for a plan that will push 7000 cars per day into the neighborhoods where actual kids ride their bikes.

+1