Can we never do Open Streets again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Pretty sure “dancing” was used metaphorically, not literally.

Biking was used literally.

Why would you think that? People danced, literally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

Eh. The street wasn't designed for "things with wheels". It was designed for motor vehicles.

Here are some bicyclists, having a great time. Maybe you should have joined them.

https://twitter.com/CMBrandonTodd/status/1180486903403024384/photo/1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

Eh. The street wasn't designed for "things with wheels". It was designed for motor vehicles.

Here are some bicyclists, having a great time. Maybe you should have joined them.

https://twitter.com/CMBrandonTodd/status/1180486903403024384/photo/1

Yes, I was there thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

Eh. The street wasn't designed for "things with wheels". It was designed for motor vehicles.

Here are some bicyclists, having a great time. Maybe you should have joined them.

https://twitter.com/CMBrandonTodd/status/1180486903403024384/photo/1

Is that right? Wow, who’da thought we had MOTOR vehicles in the 1700’s

We had horses pulling wagons and carriages. And then we had bicycles.

And THEN came cars. Long after bicycles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Is that right? Wow, who’da thought we had MOTOR vehicles in the 1700’s

We had horses pulling wagons and carriages. And then we had bicycles.

And THEN came cars. Long after bicycles.

I know that there weren't photographs in the 1700s, but if there had been photographs in the 1700s, they would have showed a Georgia Avenue that looked VERY different from the Georgia Avenue today - if there had even been a Georgia Avenue in the 1700s, which I am pretty sure there wasn't.

Talk to the highway engineers. They're not designing the roads for horses pulling wagons and carriages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

Eh. The street wasn't designed for "things with wheels". It was designed for motor vehicles.

Here are some bicyclists, having a great time. Maybe you should have joined them.

https://twitter.com/CMBrandonTodd/status/1180486903403024384/photo/1

Yes, I was there thanks.

I'm sorry you didn't have a good time. I mean that sincerely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: No one SAID it was a WABA event! JFC people! It was ON the WABA events section. That DOES NOT mean WABA planned it!

Yes but people (person?) keep getting bent out of shape that WABA said X but it was really Y. Stop arguing what WABA said about someone else’s event is all I’m suggesting. WABA is obviously going to promote biking because that’s their thing. The yoga studios promoted yoga, but no one complains when it wasn’t just people doing yoga.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is that right? Wow, who’da thought we had MOTOR vehicles in the 1700’s

We had horses pulling wagons and carriages. And then we had bicycles.

And THEN came cars. Long after bicycles.

I know that there weren't photographs in the 1700s, but if there had been photographs in the 1700s, they would have showed a Georgia Avenue that looked VERY different from the Georgia Avenue today - if there had even been a Georgia Avenue in the 1700s, which I am pretty sure there wasn't.

Talk to the highway engineers. They're not designing the roads for horses pulling wagons and carriages.

You can thank bicyclists for your modern roads.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_American_Bicyclists

Not cars.

Bicycles.



Cyclists were advocating for better roads 30 years before the first cars started making streets deathtraps. So the next time you see someone on s bike, why don’t you kiss their firm, Lycra-clad ass and tell them “thank you”, a-hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You can thank bicyclists for your modern roads.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_American_Bicyclists

Not cars.

Bicycles.

Cyclists were advocating for better roads 30 years before the first cars started making streets deathtraps. So the next time you see someone on s bike, why don’t you kiss their firm, Lycra-clad ass and tell them “thank you”, a-hole.

What are you hollering at me for? Holler at the transportation departments who are designing and operating roads for people to drive cars on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I heard about it from WABA this summer, I was incredibly excited. As a cyclist, I really liked the idea of it as a concept - getting cars off the road and letting everyone see the great possibilities of car-less roads as a vision of the future. But it totally failed in execution because people were walking all over the damn road. WTF? So you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed because some dumbass would just step right out in front of you like you weren’t there. Uh HELLO! It’s still a road people! Just because there aren’t cars doesn’t mean you can just walk where the hell you want. “Open streets” =/= “pedestrians don’t have to stay on the sidewalk”. So it was sort of a failure from the perspective of using the street for car-less travel, because it just resulted in mobs of people getting in the way. Next time they need to make it clear that walkers need to stay on the sidewalk.

Sounds like you felt the same way about pedestrians as many drivers feel about cyclists. I’m sorry “you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed,” because you had to share the road with slower moving people. It does suck.

I have no problem with people walking.

Just do it on the sidewalks where you're supposed to. The street is not for people walking. It's for things with wheels, moving faster than you can walk. And in this case of open streets, that means bicycles. Streets were not designed for people. Period.

Yes. Before cars, there was no such thing as a street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who says “walkers”? Sounds like The Walking Dead.


Pedestrians.

Ok, how about “obstacles”.

Which is what they are when you’re trying ride your bike on a street designed for things with wheels

Eh. The street wasn't designed for "things with wheels". It was designed for motor vehicles.

Here are some bicyclists, having a great time. Maybe you should have joined them.

https://twitter.com/CMBrandonTodd/status/1180486903403024384/photo/1

Yes, I was there thanks.

I was there too, biking. And I had a great time. If you don't want pedestrians around then I suggest you go to a velodrome. Or try biking in I-395 good luck wherever you go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I heard about it from WABA this summer, I was incredibly excited. As a cyclist, I really liked the idea of it as a concept - getting cars off the road and letting everyone see the great possibilities of car-less roads as a vision of the future. But it totally failed in execution because people were walking all over the damn road. WTF? So you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed because some dumbass would just step right out in front of you like you weren’t there. Uh HELLO! It’s still a road people! Just because there aren’t cars doesn’t mean you can just walk where the hell you want. “Open streets” =/= “pedestrians don’t have to stay on the sidewalk”. So it was sort of a failure from the perspective of using the street for car-less travel, because it just resulted in mobs of people getting in the way. Next time they need to make it clear that walkers need to stay on the sidewalk.

Sounds like you felt the same way about pedestrians as many drivers feel about cyclists. I’m sorry “you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed,” because you had to share the road with slower moving people. It does suck.

I have no problem with people walking.

Just do it on the sidewalks where you're supposed to. The street is not for people walking. It's for things with wheels, moving faster than you can walk. And in this case of open streets, that means bicycles. Streets were not designed for people. Period.

Yes. Before cars, there was no such thing as a street.

WTH are you talking about? Of course there were streets before cars. Have you ever been anywhere except a suburb your whole entire life?

Do you realize in Rome there are streets that are 2,500 years old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I heard about it from WABA this summer, I was incredibly excited. As a cyclist, I really liked the idea of it as a concept - getting cars off the road and letting everyone see the great possibilities of car-less roads as a vision of the future. But it totally failed in execution because people were walking all over the damn road. WTF? So you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed because some dumbass would just step right out in front of you like you weren’t there. Uh HELLO! It’s still a road people! Just because there aren’t cars doesn’t mean you can just walk where the hell you want. “Open streets” =/= “pedestrians don’t have to stay on the sidewalk”. So it was sort of a failure from the perspective of using the street for car-less travel, because it just resulted in mobs of people getting in the way. Next time they need to make it clear that walkers need to stay on the sidewalk.

Sounds like you felt the same way about pedestrians as many drivers feel about cyclists. I’m sorry “you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed,” because you had to share the road with slower moving people. It does suck.

I have no problem with people walking.

Just do it on the sidewalks where you're supposed to. The street is not for people walking. It's for things with wheels, moving faster than you can walk. And in this case of open streets, that means bicycles. Streets were not designed for people. Period.

Yes. Before cars, there was no such thing as a street.

WTH are you talking about? Of course there were streets before cars. Have you ever been anywhere except a suburb your whole entire life?

Do you realize in Rome there are streets that are 2,500 years old?

Yes. I'm making fun of the jackass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I heard about it from WABA this summer, I was incredibly excited. As a cyclist, I really liked the idea of it as a concept - getting cars off the road and letting everyone see the great possibilities of car-less roads as a vision of the future. But it totally failed in execution because people were walking all over the damn road. WTF? So you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed because some dumbass would just step right out in front of you like you weren’t there. Uh HELLO! It’s still a road people! Just because there aren’t cars doesn’t mean you can just walk where the hell you want. “Open streets” =/= “pedestrians don’t have to stay on the sidewalk”. So it was sort of a failure from the perspective of using the street for car-less travel, because it just resulted in mobs of people getting in the way. Next time they need to make it clear that walkers need to stay on the sidewalk.

Sounds like you felt the same way about pedestrians as many drivers feel about cyclists. I’m sorry “you couldn’t ride down the street at any useful speed,” because you had to share the road with slower moving people. It does suck.

I have no problem with people walking.

Just do it on the sidewalks where you're supposed to. The street is not for people walking. It's for things with wheels, moving faster than you can walk. And in this case of open streets, that means bicycles. Streets were not designed for people. Period.

Yes. Before cars, there was no such thing as a street.

Yeah the whole point of events like Open Streets is to show that the way that streets currently exist or were designed does not currently work for the vast majority of people who live in the area. So yes technically streets were at some point designed for cars but that is a clear misuse of city space and resources as it is dangerous and unpleasant to walk around Georgia Avenue. So hopefully this is a step in the right direction of them getting redesigned to be more people centric rather than car centric.

Street were at some point re-designed te be car centric but that is changing- hopefully in ten years this whole "streets were designed around cars, get over it and get out of my way" line of thought will be dead because streets will be designed around people instead.