Reply to The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC...

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC..."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]That's what's so wrong about these efforts.  Upper Connecticut will never be cool or hip.  That's because it is the part of town that people move to when they start families and stop being cool or hip.  It's a land of mom jeans and power walks.  Conversations about schools and youth sports.  Kid friendly restaurants and gardening.  It's where Gen Z and Zoomers live at home with their parents.  It's where Gen X moved when they had kids, just like the Boomers before them, and Millennials now.

To put it simply, there are too many kids and fuddy duddies to ever attract the trendy and childless.  [/quote]

It's the first I've ever heard that walking and riding a bike are things only done by the trendy and childless. I've been walking since I was 1, and riding a bike since I was 4, so this comes as quite a surprise.[/quote]

That's why I want our neighborhood streets to be safe so that my kids can ride bikes there as they do now.  More cars and trucks diverted from gridlocked Connecticut Avenue onto these streets will make them less safe.[/quote]

Agreed! Neighborhood streets should be safe. All streets should be safe! Including Connecticut Avenue, which is also a neighborhood street and should also be safe.[/quote]

How exactly will bike lanes make Connecticut Avenue safe, particularly when they squeeze capacity down?  And Connecticut Avenue and the other major arterials are where the through traffic is supposed to go, because Upper Northwest Washington (Ward 3) lacks any of the radial freeways like in SE, SW, MoCo and Arlington.[/quote]

Read the DDOT report and the thousands of studies available nationally about how to make streets safer. Don't take the word of rando's on a message board. Read the reports from traffic engineers who have had success in making city streets more multi-modal and safer.

Capacity isn't going to be squeezed down. There are three lanes each way now. The curb lanes are for parking. There is a through lane and the center lanes are through lanes that generally get caught with turning vehicles. So basically there is one through lane now, with opportunity for 1-2 more through lanes depending on conditions.

In the new configuration, there are pocket turn lanes, which means instead of 1-2 through lanes, there will be 2 through lanes. Hence little to no degradation of throughput, no "squeezing down"

The traffic doom being hypothesized by the project opponents is pure fantasy. [/quote]

The other thing that bike lanes proponents don’t get is that the dedicated turn lanes are no panacea for the neighborhoods.  In fact, residents on the side streets don’t want those at all because they will just invite Connecticut Avenue traffic to divert through those streets to get around avenue congestion.[/quote]

They aren't putting turn lanes at every intersection (which would cause what you are saying).  They are tactically putting turn lanes at place where PEOPLE ALREADY TURN.  Like Military, Nebraska, Porter and Calvert.  I think that's probably all of the streets that they were planning on for Left Hand Turn lanes.

Jesus... you're making stuff up to react to at this point.[/quote]

So you've seen the latest plans? Do tell.[/quote]

Those were in the July 2022 plans already, dunce.[/quote]

Link?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics