K Street Transitway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why people keep saying that no one uses the bike lanes. I walk every day from Farragut north to McPherson and see lots of people using the north/south bike lanes that cross K. The other day I was irritated because there was a man waiting to cross the street and he was standing off the curb right in the bike lane. The biker, who has the right of way and green light, rang her bell at him repeatedly but he was oblivious, and she needed to swerve into the traffic lane to avoid him. People are so rude. Of course he was on his phone.

Pedestrians actually always have right of way, even in the bike lane. It’s rude to stand in it, and I’m always happy to roll my eyes at people who do that as I swerve my bike into the street to avoid them, but that’s the law.

That can’t be right. As a pedestrian, I can just stand in the middle of the road blocking traffic that has a green light and I have the right of way? I don’t think that’s true. Maybe I didn’t explain it well but we had a red light/no crossing — he had stepped off the curb and was standing in the roadway, in the bike lane, blocking a cyclist that had a green light and was coming up the road. If I did that and was hit by a car, they would say I was jaywalking, not that I had the right of way.

Maybe you’re right? I don’t know, I just always assume when I’m on my bike or in my car that pedestrians always have right of way. I do not assume that when I’m a pedestrian because I don’t want to get hit.

You certainly have to exercise due care when you're driving, and I think also when you're on your bike, regardless of what the pedestrian is doing. That's according to the law. But then additionally, of course, most people don't want to hit people! I don't want to hit anyone when I'm driving, I don't want to hit anyone when I'm biking, even if they're doing something the law says they're not supposed to do.

"Jaywalking" is not a legal term, it's just a pejorative. If a driver hit you while you were crossing with a don't walk, the police would probably find you at fault for disobeying the signal.

[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:People barely use the bike lanes we already have. The number of cyclists is pathetically small, especially given how relentlessly the city promotes it.

This is shaping up to be the hottest year in recorded history. Maybe it’s time we start making it easier for people to commute without making things even worse. If you care at all about the planet we will leave future generations, maybe you should also get behind that.

Riding bikes makes *zero* difference to global warming. It’s purely symbolic.

Cars make a big difference in global warming. You're right that any one individual's choice to bike vs. drive is meaningless, but that doesn't mean making it easier for people not to drive isn't helpful for slowing climate change.

Not really. Transportation emissions from private vehicles are a small part of the pie. You would get more bang for your buck in CO2 emissions by reducing air travel. For example, one seat on a round trip flight from DC to Tokyo produces about the same GHG emissions as a family car in the US. If you’re biking to work but flying all over the world then you are not really helping anything.

Heck, planting trees in the bike lanes would do more for global warming.

We’ll just plant trees in the car lane.

That would also be more beneficial to the environment then bike lanes. Unfortunately that would destroy the entire economy and cause people to starve. There's no associated systemic downsides with planting trees in the bike lanes.

there’s no downside to you taking the metro from Bethesda to downtown.

Except for the fact that I live in DC, like most of the people complaining about the waste of resources that are bike lanes.

Considering their usage numbers, are bike lanes even carbon neutral?

Fortunately, there are plenty of Metro stations in DC! And buses too. You could even use the bike lanes.

I take the metro when I have all day and don't need to transport anything. As for buses, unfortunately they've been cut back. If only there was a pot of money being wasted on benefiting a handful of people that could be used to support mass transit. Bikes, maybe on a day like today. But otherwise, it's too hot, too cold, raining, etc. If only we lived in San Diego and didn't have kids. As it stands, I'm spending more and more of my disposable income in Maryland and Virginia because they're easier to get to but don't worry. I'm sure those bike lanes will eventually create the urban utopia of your pre-industrial revolution english village dream.

Considering their usage numbers, are the bike lanes in DC even carbon neutral?

I don't think city living is for you. Maybe Loudoun County? Somewhere where most of the land is used for roads or parking lots.

No thank you. I was here before you and I will be here after you leave. I love mass transit and walking. Wish we had more of it and stopped wasting our money on unused vanity projects for twitter obsessed late stage boomers and virtue signaling millennials.

If you love mass transit and walking, then use mass transit and walking. Bike lanes are not the enemy of mass transit and walking. Cars are.

They eliminated Circulator routes in order to pay for bike lanes.

You could repeat that assertion a million more times, and it still wouldn't be true.

You're right, the circulator lines were only $7 million. Bike funding is $36 million. The free bus fare proposal is $41 million.

[Anonymous]

Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Another cute post disconnected from reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bike lanes make zero difference to the environment because:

1. Hardly anyone uses them

2. The people who do use them were never going to drive in the first place. If they weren’t biking, they’d be on some form of public transportation

The only way bike lanes could make even a small difference is if people en masse abandon cars for bikes and that will obviously never happen because most people have no interest in cycling

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Another cute post disconnected from reality.

Sorry but if K street tries to be another Rockville pike it will fail even worse than Rockville pike fails. Let it be a street in a city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Cities work when they are able to attract high earning residents and commuters to spend money that Democrats then waste on stupid programs. Cities don’t work when they are only attractive to nonprofit and NGO workers. Then you end up with Portland and SF, which we’re about 5 years from being.

[Anonymous]

I guess San Francisco and Portland are the new Republican talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Cities work when they are able to attract high earning residents and commuters to spend money that Democrats then waste on stupid programs. Cities don’t work when they are only attractive to nonprofit and NGO workers. Then you end up with Portland and SF, which we’re about 5 years from being.

Let Tysons be Tysons, the city be a city. Plenty enough for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

We don't plan our cities around rich, white progressive fantasies about bike lanes and a carless DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

We don't plan our cities around rich, white progressive fantasies about bike lanes and a carless DC.

No, we're supposed to plan our cities around the cars of rich, white suburbanites!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

We don't plan our cities around rich, white progressive fantasies about bike lanes and a carless DC.

This is about K street. Ottawa has a nice pedestrian main street. Make K street one with transit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Cities work when they are able to attract high earning residents and commuters to spend money that Democrats then waste on stupid programs. Cities don’t work when they are only attractive to nonprofit and NGO workers. Then you end up with Portland and SF, which we’re about 5 years from being.

I live in DC and have a high income; I avoid downtown because I hate driving down there and the bus service is a mess. I would go down there more if the bus and cycling network were better. If they had a bike lane and bus lane down K so I could take the bus down 16th and then grab a bike share or a bus down K (without having to cross several streets) then I would definitely spend more time and money down there. If I want to go shopping in a suburban strip mall I will drive to Pike and Rose. Would LOVE to be able to take more reliable transit downtown for dinners out. I recently went to Georgetown and the bus service was so non-sensical- I had to walk several blocks to pick up the S bus on the way home because it does this weird thing where it is closer to 15th for the first few blocks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

We don't plan our cities around rich, white progressive fantasies about bike lanes and a carless DC.

What is wrong with making progress? It doesn't seem to be working super well right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities work when they are cities, not when they try (and fail) to be like the suburbs. Put in some transit and space for deliveries, ban the cars, and the rest (bikes, walkers, etc..) we can sort out later.

Cities work when they are able to attract high earning residents and commuters to spend money that Democrats then waste on stupid programs. Cities don’t work when they are only attractive to nonprofit and NGO workers. Then you end up with Portland and SF, which we’re about 5 years from being.

I live in DC and have a high income; I avoid downtown because I hate driving down there and the bus service is a mess. I would go down there more if the bus and cycling network were better. If they had a bike lane and bus lane down K so I could take the bus down 16th and then grab a bike share or a bus down K (without having to cross several streets) then I would definitely spend more time and money down there. If I want to go shopping in a suburban strip mall I will drive to Pike and Rose. Would LOVE to be able to take more reliable transit downtown for dinners out. I recently went to Georgetown and the bus service was so non-sensical- I had to walk several blocks to pick up the S bus on the way home because it does this weird thing where it is closer to 15th for the first few blocks.

Yeah, all these people who are like "the bike lanes are hardly used" are completely ignore the several hundred THOUSAND trips taken each month by people on freaking rental Capital Bikeshares.