Connecticut Avenue bike lane officially dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

That is what it seems like. I can't believe I am saying this, but I am with the bike bros here, this seems like a bad plan...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lane plan was brought to us by the supporters of the Defund the Police movement and the Connecticut Ave housing voucher fan boys. Times up, we've seen your prior work and are not fans.

Actually, it was a result of over 50 public meetings and engineering experts at DDOT with the support of the ANCs and the current and former Councilmembers.

We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 80 years. There isn't space on our streets, there isn't time with respect to climate change so we need to do something else that is more accommodating for the 21st Century.

I do not understand why bike-lane supporters think "well, the majority of ANC commissioners supported this" is such a cogent reason for everyone to support it. Most of those commissioners -- who, for the millionth time, have no actual power -- were elected thanks to like 300 people who came out to actually vote, hardly a mandate. It's such a dumb argument, yet they trot it out over and over. No wonder Bowser ignored them.

ANCs are the interns of city government. They are a glorified 311 service. No one cares what they think about anything, which is why so few people bother voting in ANC elections.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

+1 Seriously, it is as if PP doesn't know kids have been living in this same neighborhood and getting around just fine for 100 years now up to an including today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure your numbers are correct. A quick Google search shows that in the 20015 zip code 22 percent are renters--and only 20 percent live in apartments, the rest in single family homes.
https://www.city-data.com/zips/20015.html#google_vignette

In the 20008 zip code, 64 percent are renters and about 60 percent live in apartments.
https://www.city-data.com/zips/20008.html

20008 is basically a long narrow zip code of the apartments along Connecticut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lane plan was brought to us by the supporters of the Defund the Police movement and the Connecticut Ave housing voucher fan boys. Times up, we've seen your prior work and are not fans.

Actually, it was a result of over 50 public meetings and engineering experts at DDOT with the support of the ANCs and the current and former Councilmembers.

We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 80 years. There isn't space on our streets, there isn't time with respect to climate change so we need to do something else that is more accommodating for the 21st Century.

I do not understand why bike-lane supporters think "well, the majority of ANC commissioners supported this" is such a cogent reason for everyone to support it. Most of those commissioners -- who, for the millionth time, have no actual power -- were elected thanks to like 300 people who came out to actually vote, hardly a mandate. It's such a dumb argument, yet they trot it out over and over. No wonder Bowser ignored them.

ANCs are the interns of city government. They are a glorified 311 service. No one cares what they think about anything, which is why so few people bother voting in ANC elections.

+1

Many of the ANCs now want to get paid! I will give them this, they are committed socialists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

The bikers were just the obnoxious vocal front. It was an alliance. Ironically most of the criticisms of the plan were against their silent partner and the bikers got sacrificied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dear bicyclists:

HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA. FU.

Sincerely,

Everyone.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bike lane plan was brought to us by the supporters of the Defund the Police movement and the Connecticut Ave housing voucher fan boys. Times up, we've seen your prior work and are not fans.

Actually, it was a result of over 50 public meetings and engineering experts at DDOT with the support of the ANCs and the current and former Councilmembers.

We cannot keep doing the same thing we have been doing for the past 80 years. There isn't space on our streets, there isn't time with respect to climate change so we need to do something else that is more accommodating for the 21st Century.

I do not understand why bike-lane supporters think "well, the majority of ANC commissioners supported this" is such a cogent reason for everyone to support it. Most of those commissioners -- who, for the millionth time, have no actual power -- were elected thanks to like 300 people who came out to actually vote, hardly a mandate. It's such a dumb argument, yet they trot it out over and over. No wonder Bowser ignored them.

ANCs are the interns of city government. They are a glorified 311 service. No one cares what they think about anything, which is why so few people bother voting in ANC elections.

+1

Many of the ANCs now want to get paid! I will give them this, they are committed socialists.

I can remember multiple ANCs posting pictures with their parents at their “inauguration” ceremonies. Saying things like “this is the honor of a lifetime .” I mean come in kid. We’ve ruined this generation with participation trophies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone currently biking on Conn Ave today is not a typical cyclist. I've been biking nearly daily in DC for decades and am still terrified whenever I have to take Conn. The vast majority of cyclists are too scared to bike there. When there are bike lanes - which will apparently not be anytime soon - there will be many more people able to bike that way.

Bike lanes on Conn Ave are the ultimate in entitlement. Inconveniencing and slowing down traffic for tens of thousands for the benefit of a few hundred.

It's absolutely true that there are very few cyclists who use Connecticut - BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BIKE LANES! The only way to increase cycling is to make cycling safe. In the Netherlands, there is a great cycling infrastructure and cycling is widespread.

Of course, DC is not going to turn into the Netherlands, you say, because we're a car culture. True. As was Netherlands in 1971, when more than 400 children were killed in traffic accidents. It took a lot of work and many years to build safe cities there, as it will here. We should start now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord

Then move to the Netherlands. And when you're too feeble to ride your bike anymore you can ask the government to euthanize you.

.

Or just move downtown where there are plenty of bike lanes and stop trying to screw up livable family neighborhoods.

What? I live in a “family neighborhood” (or at least that’s what I think you have in mind) and bike lanes are essential to protecting my children when they travel back and forth to school and activities. This is their only way to get around because they can’t drive, the bus network is pathetic, their parents are not privileged enough to have the time or the money to drive them around everywhere, and the notion of them taking rides when random strangers driving ride-shares doesn’t really appeal. How would you like them to get around? Or would you prefer them to just sit at home and pick up apart your obnoxiously idiotic claims?

They can walk.

It takes three times as long to walk as to bike, which would mean they could do very little in the way of activities.

Where do you live and where are these activities on Connecticut Avenue that they can't get to unless on a bike? How old are your kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that all parking restrictions on CT Avenue are getting lifted? In other words, you can park during rush hour?

That would be an absolutely horrible result from this effort if that is the case.

Yes, that is what the interim director said yesterday. Instead of 24/7 parking on one side with bike lanes, DDOT is going to life all parking restrictions so there is parking on both sides 24/7. That is their proposed "road diet."

The result of course, is that the same traffic woes anticipated by the "save connecticut ave" group will be in play, without the added benefit of some drivers switching to biking instead. Under this scenario, you lose the easy access to sidewalks for the handicapped community, and buses will have to revert to the pulling in with the rear of the bus taking part of a lane at each stop. Add to it, bikers will still want to use the Avenue and will be within their rights to simply use a full lane, with resulting car back-ups behind them.

Well, this is now crazy. I feel like I was in the 98% of people that didn't give a rat's a** if they installed bike lanes or not...but how in the heck is this now the outcome?

because the goal has always been traffic calming. the anti-bike-obsessed refused to listen to this.

Indeed, and without the bike lanes, it’s a true win for pedestrians. The pro-bike-lane obsessed refused to listen to this.

Not really. It will still be a mostly unpleasant auto-centric traffic sewer

Adding another hazard (the bike lanes) would have been even worse.

Bike lanes increase sight distance. Parked cars reduce them. Legit this is way worse.