Connecticut Ave bike lanes are back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All traffic deaths are horrible and streets must be made safer for all users. That's why I find it so offensive that the bike lobby, led by Charles Allen, is seeking to include language in the budget that would deny any expenditure for safer streets that did not include bike lanes. It shows that for the bike lobby, it is about biking, not safe streets. Bike lanes are not going to happen for years because there is a cash crunch and issues to be worked out, so why not make Connecticut Avenue safer in the interim?

How would the street be made safer without consideration for cyclists? Sure, they can put in some bulbouts, but if cyclists are left competing with motorists in driving lanes, then it is unsafe for cyclists. If cyclists are left competing with pedestrians on sidewalks, then it is unsafe for pedestrians.

One solution is to shift a new north-south bike lane to Reno Rd. Maybe it won't be as convenient for some bikers to reach the Connecticut Ave bars, but a Reno bike lane would provide easy access to locations up and down Connecticut and much of Wisconsin Ave. Reno has a center turn lane that is underultized or unnecessary at all but the most busy intersections so space could be re-allocated to bike lanes on the side. Connecticut Ave. is a designated arterial and evaluation route and where the thru and commuter traffic should be encouraged to go, instead of diverting more of it to Reno.

Reno Road isn't wide enough to accommodate turn lanes, through lanes and bike lanes. DDOT already dismissed that option years ago.

[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:Actually I would think that bike lane advocates would welcome strict enforcement of cycling regulations and establishing new ones that take into consideration all commuters not just cyclists. After all safety is what’s important here right?

sure, you can enforce a bike rider harmlessly going through a red (often this is safer for the rider, but I digress) as soon as you give tickets to every single car rolling through stop signs. Cars literally never come to a full stop unless there is cross traffic.

A bicyclist going through a stop sign at full speed is far more dangerous than a car that you think didn't technically, 100 percent completely stop at a stop sign. It's disingenuous to pretend they're the same thing.

That why there are so many people killed by bicyclists and not people driving cars. Oh nevermind, the data says it's the opposite. Huh.

There would be many more if there were more cyclists, and the last cyclist killed in DC was killed by …. ANOTHER CYCLIST.




But, bro: drivers hate you, pedestrians hate you, and even other cyclists hate you. Maybe it’s time for you ask AITA?

get a grip. I don’t know what kind of psychodrama the sight of a bike triggers in you, but it’s really weird.

You hate it when people bring up facts that don’t fit your narrative. Sorry, bro. Facts are facts. The last cyclist killed in DC was in fact killed by another cyclist.

DP. This is obviously a tragedy, and I hope the police prosecute the surviving rider if she violated the law.

But I also don't think the fact that there was a fatal bike crash involving another bike means that's the only thing anyone needs to ever think about related to making it safer to ride a bike in D.C. You would not, for instance, say that the homicide by stabbing committed in southwest D.C. in April means the police should never worry about gun crimes.

Using this horrible death as some sort of weird cudgel or gotcha over public policy questions that long predate this incident doesn't really make it seem like you care any more about the man who died in this crash than the people you're hectoring about it.

Yes, it was a tragedy. But the bike bros love exploiting tragedies as weird cudgels when there’s a car involved, even when the cyclist was doing something illegal and objectively dangerous. The bike crowd also likes to claim that no one gets killed by cyclists. Sorry you don’t like the facts or the shoe being on the other foot.

Nice strawman with the knife murder. You must have a farm with all that straw you throw around.

Ah, so you're arguing with "the bike bros" and "the bike crowd," not with me, an actual person who supports bike lanes and also thinks the woman who killed this guy should go to jail if she broke the law. Good to have that cleared up.

Okay. But how should the cycling infrastructure be changed to reduce do speeds and encourage safe practices? What sorts of traffic enforcement measures should compliment those infrastructure changes to make sure that it never happens again?

One possibility is a "waffle cone" junction. This creates a larger queuing area for people waiting at lights, that then narrows as it crosses the intersection. You wait in the "ice cream" and then proceed down the narrowing cone, and the other direction does the same with an inverted cone.

It might also be worth considering limiting e-bikes to 16ish MPH (25KM) like they do in Europe.

We could also limit cars to 20-25 MPH like they do elsewhere.

If an e-bike can go 20mph it needs to be in the same category as a car and follow car rules, not bike rules. I live on a block that has a light at one end and we are getting ebikes speeding through the red light and then flying down our street at high speed. It's a short block so there isn't a lot of warning that they are there before they whip by you. Yesterday, I saw a woman crossing the block in the crosswalk pushing a stroller, and she was almost knocked over by an ebike that sped through the light and seemed to come out of nowhere. When you see a red light at the end of the block you know no cars are coming and can start to cross, but it doesn't work the same way with the ebikes as they are much more unpredictable. It's a bad accident waiting to happen.

So true. E-bikes, especially cargo bikes, are like heavy SUVs compared with ordinary bicycles. A child or an elderly person (or anyone) can be severely injured if hit by an e-bike at cruising speed.

This is a vacuous point. How many kids are killed by SUVs and cars everyday compared to e-bike? And yet you favor SUVs still speeding through Connecticut Ave with the status quo.

As a pedestrian, I’ve had — and witnessed — more near misses with e-bikes recently than with cars. I can see and hear a car more easily and, for the most part, count on them to obey traffic lights. Bikes of all kinds are much more unpredictable and often aren’t visible/audible until the last moment.

I don’t favor anyone using any type of transportation speeding thru Connecticut Avenue or any street. I’d like to see aggressive, consistent enforcement of current rules along with additional regulations that reclassify e-bikes and require them to follow auto, not bike, regulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

The DMV data is also pertaining to commuter traffic, which is different than other traffic, like midday shopping and errands in the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

You can shout fake news all you like, but the MWCOG is one of the best surveys we have. (It also doesn't matter what bicyclists in Gaithersburg are doing, because there's only, like, two of them. There aren't enough bicyclists in the burbs compared to those in DC to move the numbers.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

You can shout fake news all you like, but the MWCOG is one of the best surveys we have. (It also doesn't matter what bicyclists in Gaithersburg are doing, because there's only, like, two of them. There aren't enough bicyclists in the burbs compared to those in DC to move the numbers.)

I didn't say anything about fake news, perhaps that's your conscience you hear. Any response to the consistent increases in bike usages as shared by CaBi?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

Then show us the CaBi data for Connecticut, north of Calvert only.

[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:Actually I would think that bike lane advocates would welcome strict enforcement of cycling regulations and establishing new ones that take into consideration all commuters not just cyclists. After all safety is what’s important here right?

sure, you can enforce a bike rider harmlessly going through a red (often this is safer for the rider, but I digress) as soon as you give tickets to every single car rolling through stop signs. Cars literally never come to a full stop unless there is cross traffic.

A bicyclist going through a stop sign at full speed is far more dangerous than a car that you think didn't technically, 100 percent completely stop at a stop sign. It's disingenuous to pretend they're the same thing.

That why there are so many people killed by bicyclists and not people driving cars. Oh nevermind, the data says it's the opposite. Huh.

There would be many more if there were more cyclists, and the last cyclist killed in DC was killed by …. ANOTHER CYCLIST.




But, bro: drivers hate you, pedestrians hate you, and even other cyclists hate you. Maybe it’s time for you ask AITA?

get a grip. I don’t know what kind of psychodrama the sight of a bike triggers in you, but it’s really weird.

You hate it when people bring up facts that don’t fit your narrative. Sorry, bro. Facts are facts. The last cyclist killed in DC was in fact killed by another cyclist.

DP. This is obviously a tragedy, and I hope the police prosecute the surviving rider if she violated the law.

But I also don't think the fact that there was a fatal bike crash involving another bike means that's the only thing anyone needs to ever think about related to making it safer to ride a bike in D.C. You would not, for instance, say that the homicide by stabbing committed in southwest D.C. in April means the police should never worry about gun crimes.

Using this horrible death as some sort of weird cudgel or gotcha over public policy questions that long predate this incident doesn't really make it seem like you care any more about the man who died in this crash than the people you're hectoring about it.

Yes, it was a tragedy. But the bike bros love exploiting tragedies as weird cudgels when there’s a car involved, even when the cyclist was doing something illegal and objectively dangerous. The bike crowd also likes to claim that no one gets killed by cyclists. Sorry you don’t like the facts or the shoe being on the other foot.

Nice strawman with the knife murder. You must have a farm with all that straw you throw around.

Ah, so you're arguing with "the bike bros" and "the bike crowd," not with me, an actual person who supports bike lanes and also thinks the woman who killed this guy should go to jail if she broke the law. Good to have that cleared up.

Okay. But how should the cycling infrastructure be changed to reduce do speeds and encourage safe practices? What sorts of traffic enforcement measures should compliment those infrastructure changes to make sure that it never happens again?

One possibility is a "waffle cone" junction. This creates a larger queuing area for people waiting at lights, that then narrows as it crosses the intersection. You wait in the "ice cream" and then proceed down the narrowing cone, and the other direction does the same with an inverted cone.

It might also be worth considering limiting e-bikes to 16ish MPH (25KM) like they do in Europe.

We could also limit cars to 20-25 MPH like they do elsewhere.

If an e-bike can go 20mph it needs to be in the same category as a car and follow car rules, not bike rules. I live on a block that has a light at one end and we are getting ebikes speeding through the red light and then flying down our street at high speed. It's a short block so there isn't a lot of warning that they are there before they whip by you. Yesterday, I saw a woman crossing the block in the crosswalk pushing a stroller, and she was almost knocked over by an ebike that sped through the light and seemed to come out of nowhere. When you see a red light at the end of the block you know no cars are coming and can start to cross, but it doesn't work the same way with the ebikes as they are much more unpredictable. It's a bad accident waiting to happen.

So true. E-bikes, especially cargo bikes, are like heavy SUVs compared with ordinary bicycles. A child or an elderly person (or anyone) can be severely injured if hit by an e-bike at cruising speed.

This is a vacuous point. How many kids are killed by SUVs and cars everyday compared to e-bike? And yet you favor SUVs still speeding through Connecticut Ave with the status quo.

As a pedestrian, I’ve had — and witnessed — more near misses with e-bikes recently than with cars. I can see and hear a car more easily and, for the most part, count on them to obey traffic lights. Bikes of all kinds are much more unpredictable and often aren’t visible/audible until the last moment.

I don’t favor anyone using any type of transportation speeding thru Connecticut Avenue or any street. I’d like to see aggressive, consistent enforcement of current rules along with additional regulations that reclassify e-bikes and require them to follow auto, not bike, regulations.

"E-Bikes" are already supposed to follow the moped regulations because that is what they are by definition. They are literally nothing more than a motorcycle EV.

[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:Actually I would think that bike lane advocates would welcome strict enforcement of cycling regulations and establishing new ones that take into consideration all commuters not just cyclists. After all safety is what’s important here right?

sure, you can enforce a bike rider harmlessly going through a red (often this is safer for the rider, but I digress) as soon as you give tickets to every single car rolling through stop signs. Cars literally never come to a full stop unless there is cross traffic.

A bicyclist going through a stop sign at full speed is far more dangerous than a car that you think didn't technically, 100 percent completely stop at a stop sign. It's disingenuous to pretend they're the same thing.

That why there are so many people killed by bicyclists and not people driving cars. Oh nevermind, the data says it's the opposite. Huh.

There would be many more if there were more cyclists, and the last cyclist killed in DC was killed by …. ANOTHER CYCLIST.




But, bro: drivers hate you, pedestrians hate you, and even other cyclists hate you. Maybe it’s time for you ask AITA?

get a grip. I don’t know what kind of psychodrama the sight of a bike triggers in you, but it’s really weird.

You hate it when people bring up facts that don’t fit your narrative. Sorry, bro. Facts are facts. The last cyclist killed in DC was in fact killed by another cyclist.

DP. This is obviously a tragedy, and I hope the police prosecute the surviving rider if she violated the law.

But I also don't think the fact that there was a fatal bike crash involving another bike means that's the only thing anyone needs to ever think about related to making it safer to ride a bike in D.C. You would not, for instance, say that the homicide by stabbing committed in southwest D.C. in April means the police should never worry about gun crimes.

Using this horrible death as some sort of weird cudgel or gotcha over public policy questions that long predate this incident doesn't really make it seem like you care any more about the man who died in this crash than the people you're hectoring about it.

Yes, it was a tragedy. But the bike bros love exploiting tragedies as weird cudgels when there’s a car involved, even when the cyclist was doing something illegal and objectively dangerous. The bike crowd also likes to claim that no one gets killed by cyclists. Sorry you don’t like the facts or the shoe being on the other foot.

Nice strawman with the knife murder. You must have a farm with all that straw you throw around.

Ah, so you're arguing with "the bike bros" and "the bike crowd," not with me, an actual person who supports bike lanes and also thinks the woman who killed this guy should go to jail if she broke the law. Good to have that cleared up.

Okay. But how should the cycling infrastructure be changed to reduce do speeds and encourage safe practices? What sorts of traffic enforcement measures should compliment those infrastructure changes to make sure that it never happens again?

One possibility is a "waffle cone" junction. This creates a larger queuing area for people waiting at lights, that then narrows as it crosses the intersection. You wait in the "ice cream" and then proceed down the narrowing cone, and the other direction does the same with an inverted cone.

It might also be worth considering limiting e-bikes to 16ish MPH (25KM) like they do in Europe.

We could also limit cars to 20-25 MPH like they do elsewhere.

If an e-bike can go 20mph it needs to be in the same category as a car and follow car rules, not bike rules. I live on a block that has a light at one end and we are getting ebikes speeding through the red light and then flying down our street at high speed. It's a short block so there isn't a lot of warning that they are there before they whip by you. Yesterday, I saw a woman crossing the block in the crosswalk pushing a stroller, and she was almost knocked over by an ebike that sped through the light and seemed to come out of nowhere. When you see a red light at the end of the block you know no cars are coming and can start to cross, but it doesn't work the same way with the ebikes as they are much more unpredictable. It's a bad accident waiting to happen.

So true. E-bikes, especially cargo bikes, are like heavy SUVs compared with ordinary bicycles. A child or an elderly person (or anyone) can be severely injured if hit by an e-bike at cruising speed.

This is a vacuous point. How many kids are killed by SUVs and cars everyday compared to e-bike? And yet you favor SUVs still speeding through Connecticut Ave with the status quo.

As a pedestrian, I’ve had — and witnessed — more near misses with e-bikes recently than with cars. I can see and hear a car more easily and, for the most part, count on them to obey traffic lights. Bikes of all kinds are much more unpredictable and often aren’t visible/audible until the last moment.

I don’t favor anyone using any type of transportation speeding thru Connecticut Avenue or any street. I’d like to see aggressive, consistent enforcement of current rules along with additional regulations that reclassify e-bikes and require them to follow auto, not bike, regulations.

"E-Bikes" are already supposed to follow the moped regulations because that is what they are by definition. They are literally nothing more than a motorcycle EV.

Somehow if you put pedals on an electric motorcycle they don’t need to be regulated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All traffic deaths are horrible and streets must be made safer for all users. That's why I find it so offensive that the bike lobby, led by Charles Allen, is seeking to include language in the budget that would deny any expenditure for safer streets that did not include bike lanes. It shows that for the bike lobby, it is about biking, not safe streets. Bike lanes are not going to happen for years because there is a cash crunch and issues to be worked out, so why not make Connecticut Avenue safer in the interim?

How would the street be made safer without consideration for cyclists? Sure, they can put in some bulbouts, but if cyclists are left competing with motorists in driving lanes, then it is unsafe for cyclists. If cyclists are left competing with pedestrians on sidewalks, then it is unsafe for pedestrians.

One solution is to shift a new north-south bike lane to Reno Rd. Maybe it won't be as convenient for some bikers to reach the Connecticut Ave bars, but a Reno bike lane would provide easy access to locations up and down Connecticut and much of Wisconsin Ave. Reno has a center turn lane that is underultized or unnecessary at all but the most busy intersections so space could be re-allocated to bike lanes on the side. Connecticut Ave. is a designated arterial and evaluation route and where the thru and commuter traffic should be encouraged to go, instead of diverting more of it to Reno.

Reno Road isn't wide enough to accommodate turn lanes, through lanes and bike lanes. DDOT already dismissed that option years ago.

In fact, it is. Eliminate the turn lane at all but the most major cross streets and the space on an entire lane could be repurposed as a dedicated bike lane, probably moved to one side or another. The bikes are likely to have to stop for the signals at the major cross streets, so having the lane become striped at those locations is quite standard and doable.

Maybe Reno doesn't have the same Urbanist cachet of re-visioning Connecticut Ave as a very dense high-rise, mixed-use corridor with bike lanes, but that's not the primary purpose of having the bike lane, is it?

[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:Actually I would think that bike lane advocates would welcome strict enforcement of cycling regulations and establishing new ones that take into consideration all commuters not just cyclists. After all safety is what’s important here right?

sure, you can enforce a bike rider harmlessly going through a red (often this is safer for the rider, but I digress) as soon as you give tickets to every single car rolling through stop signs. Cars literally never come to a full stop unless there is cross traffic.

A bicyclist going through a stop sign at full speed is far more dangerous than a car that you think didn't technically, 100 percent completely stop at a stop sign. It's disingenuous to pretend they're the same thing.

That why there are so many people killed by bicyclists and not people driving cars. Oh nevermind, the data says it's the opposite. Huh.

There would be many more if there were more cyclists, and the last cyclist killed in DC was killed by …. ANOTHER CYCLIST.




But, bro: drivers hate you, pedestrians hate you, and even other cyclists hate you. Maybe it’s time for you ask AITA?

get a grip. I don’t know what kind of psychodrama the sight of a bike triggers in you, but it’s really weird.

You hate it when people bring up facts that don’t fit your narrative. Sorry, bro. Facts are facts. The last cyclist killed in DC was in fact killed by another cyclist.

DP. This is obviously a tragedy, and I hope the police prosecute the surviving rider if she violated the law.

But I also don't think the fact that there was a fatal bike crash involving another bike means that's the only thing anyone needs to ever think about related to making it safer to ride a bike in D.C. You would not, for instance, say that the homicide by stabbing committed in southwest D.C. in April means the police should never worry about gun crimes.

Using this horrible death as some sort of weird cudgel or gotcha over public policy questions that long predate this incident doesn't really make it seem like you care any more about the man who died in this crash than the people you're hectoring about it.

Yes, it was a tragedy. But the bike bros love exploiting tragedies as weird cudgels when there’s a car involved, even when the cyclist was doing something illegal and objectively dangerous. The bike crowd also likes to claim that no one gets killed by cyclists. Sorry you don’t like the facts or the shoe being on the other foot.

Nice strawman with the knife murder. You must have a farm with all that straw you throw around.

Ah, so you're arguing with "the bike bros" and "the bike crowd," not with me, an actual person who supports bike lanes and also thinks the woman who killed this guy should go to jail if she broke the law. Good to have that cleared up.

Okay. But how should the cycling infrastructure be changed to reduce do speeds and encourage safe practices? What sorts of traffic enforcement measures should compliment those infrastructure changes to make sure that it never happens again?

One possibility is a "waffle cone" junction. This creates a larger queuing area for people waiting at lights, that then narrows as it crosses the intersection. You wait in the "ice cream" and then proceed down the narrowing cone, and the other direction does the same with an inverted cone.

It might also be worth considering limiting e-bikes to 16ish MPH (25KM) like they do in Europe.

We could also limit cars to 20-25 MPH like they do elsewhere.

If an e-bike can go 20mph it needs to be in the same category as a car and follow car rules, not bike rules. I live on a block that has a light at one end and we are getting ebikes speeding through the red light and then flying down our street at high speed. It's a short block so there isn't a lot of warning that they are there before they whip by you. Yesterday, I saw a woman crossing the block in the crosswalk pushing a stroller, and she was almost knocked over by an ebike that sped through the light and seemed to come out of nowhere. When you see a red light at the end of the block you know no cars are coming and can start to cross, but it doesn't work the same way with the ebikes as they are much more unpredictable. It's a bad accident waiting to happen.

So true. E-bikes, especially cargo bikes, are like heavy SUVs compared with ordinary bicycles. A child or an elderly person (or anyone) can be severely injured if hit by an e-bike at cruising speed.

This is a vacuous point. How many kids are killed by SUVs and cars everyday compared to e-bike? And yet you favor SUVs still speeding through Connecticut Ave with the status quo.

As a pedestrian, I’ve had — and witnessed — more near misses with e-bikes recently than with cars. I can see and hear a car more easily and, for the most part, count on them to obey traffic lights. Bikes of all kinds are much more unpredictable and often aren’t visible/audible until the last moment.

I don’t favor anyone using any type of transportation speeding thru Connecticut Avenue or any street. I’d like to see aggressive, consistent enforcement of current rules along with additional regulations that reclassify e-bikes and require them to follow auto, not bike, regulations.

"E-Bikes" are already supposed to follow the moped regulations because that is what they are by definition. They are literally nothing more than a motorcycle EV.

Somehow if you put pedals on an electric motorcycle they don’t need to be regulated.

Cool cool.

So I should be able to attach a flyswatter to a Glock, and it will no longer be a handgun.


Nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

What do you think the CaBi data is telling you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

What do you think the CaBi data is telling you?

You're welcome to go back and read what was posted about it. Pages 28/29 have a lot of easy to understand infographics if you are still having trouble interpreting the increase in ridership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

What do you think the CaBi data is telling you?

You're welcome to go back and read what was posted about it. Pages 28/29 have a lot of easy to understand infographics if you are still having trouble interpreting the increase in ridership.

Press releases from Capital Bikeshare touting Capital Bikeshare are worthless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I may have missed it as I didn’t read the 43 pages of comments, but is there any data or info on how many bikers would be expected on this route?

You can look at things like use of Capital Bike share stations and the increasing sales of bikes in DC and the region as two metrics in terms of demand.

The most authoritative analysis is by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. They have cycling (as well as bus riding and subways, etc). all way down, even when adjusting for work from home. Driving is the only mode of transportation that's getting more popular, which is surprising and not surprising.

https://www.mwcog.org/documents/2023/08/14/state-of-the-commute-survey-report--carsharing-state-of-the-commute-telework-travel-surveys/

Anyone who uses data from a small sample to discount population data either has no grasp of statistics and/or is not interested in a meaningful discussion.

Can you please point to the population data that shows driving has not increased and that bikes and other forms of transit have? Genuinely asking as I am looking for data on this.

They have no data but sure have a lot of excuses for why people should not pay attention to the most trusted data sources, MWCOG and ACS.

+1000

The CaBi data is all over this thread. It clearly shows an increase in bike usage. This poster has chosen to continue to post the same DMV wide survey over and over again as if the habits of people in Gaithersburg are related to those in Cleveland Park

The DMV data is also pertaining to commuter traffic, which is different than other traffic, like midday shopping and errands in the neighborhood.

I just let out a big sigh reading this because you’re clearly talking out of your you know where.

The MWCOG survey actually asks about non-work trips during working hours. What they found is that 2/3 of people who work from home take 1 or less personal trips during the day per week.