Bike lanes violate disability access laws, new lawsuit says

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lot of hostility on this thread towards disabled people.

Try being a cyclist . . .

The difference is that cyclists, unlike the disabled, have earned it.

Earned it how? And does this apply to all cyclists? If so, what omniscience allows you to make such sweeping generalizations?

even cyclists think cyclists are jerks

And you would rather these “jerks” be driving cars? Really?

[Anonymous]

The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the lawsuit:

12 percent of DC residents have mobility disabilities
Three-quarters of them are African American
One third of them are over the age of 65

Bicyclists five times more likely to be white than Black
Bicyclists predominantly male, white, 25-40, higher income

Yeah, because that has absolutely nothing to do with nearly zero bike infrastructure existing in the majority minority areas of the city or the fact that those areas are literally separated from the downtown core by highway bridges that have the world's tiniest sidewalks (absent the brand new bridge, which is quite nice). Yeah, of course it has nothing to do with that...

"Are highways racist?" PP has some thinking to do.

Highways themselves are not racist, but those who planned the highways in many urban areas were. Not that DC, like many urban areas, chose to apply eminent domain and take away land and housing away from largely lower income minority communities rather than take the more logical route through higher income largely white communities. If you had constructed the in-bound highway to DC from College Park down through eastern Montgomery County, you would not have needed to construct bridges over the Potomac. But instead, you take away land across the Potomac forcing the construction of multiple larger volume bridges to avoid the NIMBY white higher income homes in Montgomery County. It would have saved the DOT a lot of money to have directed the in-bound highway from the North instead of trying to make it bypass the city across the river. But that was never going to be feasible with the NIMBY's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

I mean, are there people who don't hate bikers? Seems like a pretty universal opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

Wanting disabled to be able to access their community without risking being run over is not solely a republican desire. I'm as liberal as they come, and somehow still value my loved ones safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

YES! The boomers caused climate change and have hoarded wealth from the workers. The bike lanes are their way to atone. There will be other opportunities to atone later. Slay!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

This is hilarious. Don't you know that the political operative who endorsed and advised the "Middle Finger Five" ANC 3C commissioners (the ones caught giving the finger to a Cleveland Park business and its sign against Connecticut Avenue bike lanes that would reduce customer parking) is... the co-founder of a prominent national Republican polling firm? The firm was Trump's lead pollster and the other co-founder produced the infamous Willie Horton ad. The operative cynically backs bike lanes on major thoroughfares as part of the "Urbanist" vision for dense Smart Growth, his current business interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point is, the same people opposing the bike lanes and complaining about the racial lens the ANC is about to consider, want to use the same racial lens to potentially fight the bike lanes.

What is the "racial lens that the ANC is about to consider"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

YES! The boomers caused climate change and have hoarded wealth from the workers. The bike lanes are their way to atone. There will be other opportunities to atone later. Slay!

Ms. Gise's (maybe quite short) term on the ANC promises to be one helluva "Slay Ride."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

Wanting disabled to be able to access their community without risking being run over is not solely a republican desire. I'm as liberal as they come, and somehow still value my loved ones safety.

And wanting to be able to navigate the city safely without a car is not a desire exclusive to "bike bros" or whatever is the pejorative-du-DCUM-jour.

As much as NDD and others love to project, "bike lanes" aren't just for bikes and are every bit as useful for electric-powered wheelchairs or other wheel-based mobility aids.

There are also very clear guidelines - referenced on page 3 of this thread - of how "bike lanes" can be designed to be fully compliant with the ADA and enable disabled people to alight from their vehicles and reach the curb without conflicting with passing micro-mobility devices.

In all seriousness, the NW NIMBY playbook is so very tired at this point and trying to exploit the concerns of disabled people and play on racial politics to mask their own crazed obsession with RPP privileges is as pathetic as it gets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is, the same people opposing the bike lanes and complaining about the racial lens the ANC is about to consider, want to use the same racial lens to potentially fight the bike lanes.

What is the "racial lens that the ANC is about to consider"?

Cycling is the whitest thing ever. Seriously, name something whiter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is, the same people opposing the bike lanes and complaining about the racial lens the ANC is about to consider, want to use the same racial lens to potentially fight the bike lanes.

What is the "racial lens that the ANC is about to consider"?

Cycling is the whitest thing ever. Seriously, name something whiter.

Posting against bike lanes on DCUM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm baffled how all these bike lanes were even built in such blatant violation of ADA law. Did the city think disabled people might not notice?

You're baffled because the plans actually currently meet ADA requirements.

See 2-6 here: https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/DDOT%20Bicycle%20Facility%20Design%20Guide%20-%20Version%202%20%28Final%29.pdf

Yeah once I saw that Nick Delladonne was involved I knew it was a fake suit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

Wanting disabled to be able to access their community without risking being run over is not solely a republican desire. I'm as liberal as they come, and somehow still value my loved ones safety.

And wanting to be able to navigate the city safely without a car is not a desire exclusive to "bike bros" or whatever is the pejorative-du-DCUM-jour.

As much as NDD and others love to project, "bike lanes" aren't just for bikes and are every bit as useful for electric-powered wheelchairs or other wheel-based mobility aids.

There are also very clear guidelines - referenced on page 3 of this thread - of how "bike lanes" can be designed to be fully compliant with the ADA and enable disabled people to alight from their vehicles and reach the curb without conflicting with passing micro-mobility devices.

In all seriousness, the NW NIMBY playbook is so very tired at this point and trying to exploit the concerns of disabled people and play on racial politics to mask their own crazed obsession with RPP privileges is as pathetic as it gets.

Connecticut Avenue NW has no Residential Parking Permit (RPP) zones. It is a major arterial roadway. But nice try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The entire Metropolitan DC Local Politics forum is a handful of cranky rich NW republican bike haters who don't represent the will or majority opinion of the people of DC whatsoever.

They only post here because they have no outlet and are constantly frustrated that the will of the majority goes against what they want. They can just move, they are rich enough to easily.

Wanting disabled to be able to access their community without risking being run over is not solely a republican desire. I'm as liberal as they come, and somehow still value my loved ones safety.

And wanting to be able to navigate the city safely without a car is not a desire exclusive to "bike bros" or whatever is the pejorative-du-DCUM-jour.

As much as NDD and others love to project, "bike lanes" aren't just for bikes and are every bit as useful for electric-powered wheelchairs or other wheel-based mobility aids.

There are also very clear guidelines - referenced on page 3 of this thread - of how "bike lanes" can be designed to be fully compliant with the ADA and enable disabled people to alight from their vehicles and reach the curb without conflicting with passing micro-mobility devices.

In all seriousness, the NW NIMBY playbook is so very tired at this point and trying to exploit the concerns of disabled people and play on racial politics to mask their own crazed obsession with RPP privileges is as pathetic as it gets.

Connecticut Avenue NW has no Residential Parking Permit (RPP) zones. It is a major arterial roadway. But nice try.

But the side streets do. And that's what this is about.