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:Connecticut Avenue is already on a diet now that parking is allowed all day, no rush hour restrictions. That should slow things down the same as bike lanes would.

With the safety argument gone and the transportation argument quite dubious seeing that it is a major public transit corridor there is no rationale at all beyond providing an expensive amenity for a couple dozen of wealthy white people in a city where a lot of basic needs are not being met. This is the kind of thing a city does when it has a growing economy and is flush with cash. That is not the DC of 2023 and thankfully Mayor Bowser and the Council understand that very well.

DC has the same poverty rate as West Virginia

Is West Virginia planning any boondoggle transportation projects that will only benefit a handful of rich people?

Exactly. DC has spent billions of dollars on bike lanes.

Not sure about billions but certainly more than $100 million over the past decade.

This is total nonsense. After repeated requests, someone in the other thread strung together a bunch of projects that allocated funding to a wide range of infra, including road maintenance, and sheepishly tried to claim that the allocations were all for bike lanes. It was patently absurd. If you nothing to contribute other than lies and manipulation, please just be quiet.

Bowser's current budget proposal alone has close to $60 million. $100 million over the past decade is neither absurd nor an exaggeration.

Bike funding routinely exceeds $100 million annually. DC has had bike lanes for 15 years. Things aren’t cheap and the DC government is very generous when it spends other people’s money

show a link for this claim

Here's a sampling from the 2023 budget:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Most of the Washington area bicycling associations annual budget comes from the city. DC pays the bike lobby to lobby the DC government. Surprisingly few real people actually give to waba

can we create a bingo card for this thread? “WABA is funded by DC and controls DDOT” will be a square.

Uh, well you can look at the budget and see for yourself

WABA gets about $100,000 annually in membership dues and almost $1 million from the government. I think that’s called astroturf

WABA has/had a contract with DC to teach 2nd graders how to ride bikes. How horrible! What monsters!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You anti-bike people are insane. Why even live in or commute to the city? Go make your life out in the exurbs and leave us alone.

Are you aware that less than 4% of the city population bike commutes? You exist in a very narrow minority.

I am aware that both myself and my children would all commute by bike if there were a safe way to do so. And I live right off Conn Ave.

Also, isn't 4% like 28,000 people? Do you want 30,000 more cars on the street for your commute?

1. It is 4% of COMMUTERS. So more like less than 10,000 people and likely substantially lower.

2. Your math indicates that you believe DC has 700,000 residents which is disqualifying.

3. There is a thing called public transit, which a lot of people use.

There are a lot of people who wouldn't be considered "commuters" who would use the bike lanes to bike from one neighborhood to another to shop, eat, etc. Those are not factored into the 4% commuter figure the anti's keep falsely citing.

1. I stand corrected it is only 2% of commuters (thanks PPP)

2. Define “a lot”

3. Why not just use other options available to you? Take transit like the rest of us or bike on side streets?

4. At a time when the city is cutting support to people to prevent eviction and displacement, do you realize how tone deaf you sound? You claim to be a cyclist but I do wonder when the actual last time you touched grass because you are living in a real small bubble.

I don't believe you take transit or patronize local businesses, if you did you wouldn't be complaining about bike lanes. The people who don't want the bike lanes are car commuters who want to be able to speed down Conn Ave at 45mph on their way from their home garage to their work garage and back to their home garage.

What's wrong with that? That's life. Do you expect people from the suburbs to drive to the district line, park, get on a bike and bike the rest of the way to work? How about anyone over 30 who doesn't want to hang their head down as they peddle UP HILL all the way back? Are you crazy? Most people simply will not, ever, bike to work. Most people. Most people don't have time, energy, or a shower waiting for them at work. Most people want to get ready for work at home, not take rumpled clothes out of their bike bag at the office. Most people have busy lives that have more in them than simply riding a bike to and from work. Get a life. Ride your bike if you are fortunate enough to have the time, but don't expect others to become completely different people than they are to suit your need to ride a bike.

So this is all about your personal resentment about people who use a different form of transit than you do?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally. Having bike lanes on a major artery is insanity.

So the rest of the major cities around the world are insane. mmmmokay.

You’re claiming all other major cities around the world have bike lanes on major roads? Interesting.

Paris is building a lot of bike infrastructure. Many less car-centric cities are already more bike and ped friendly.

Since Paris embarked on this journey, its population has declined from all time highs to the lowest level since the 19th century. Turns out that if you intentionally make it harder for people to get around, eg “traffic calming” and “slow streets”, it makes people’s lives miserable enough to leave in large numbers. Maybe that’s the goal? I don’t know.

+1 It just makes life hell for most of us. Life is already hard enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally. Having bike lanes on a major artery is insanity.

So the rest of the major cities around the world are insane. mmmmokay.

You’re claiming all other major cities around the world have bike lanes on major roads? Interesting.

Paris is building a lot of bike infrastructure. Many less car-centric cities are already more bike and ped friendly.

Since Paris embarked on this journey, its population has declined from all time highs to the lowest level since the 19th century. Turns out that if you intentionally make it harder for people to get around, eg “traffic calming” and “slow streets”, it makes people’s lives miserable enough to leave in large numbers. Maybe that’s the goal? I don’t know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You anti-bike people are insane. Why even live in or commute to the city? Go make your life out in the exurbs and leave us alone.

Are you aware that less than 4% of the city population bike commutes? You exist in a very narrow minority.

I am aware that both myself and my children would all commute by bike if there were a safe way to do so. And I live right off Conn Ave.

Also, isn't 4% like 28,000 people? Do you want 30,000 more cars on the street for your commute?

1. It is 4% of COMMUTERS. So more like less than 10,000 people and likely substantially lower.

2. Your math indicates that you believe DC has 700,000 residents which is disqualifying.

3. There is a thing called public transit, which a lot of people use.

There are a lot of people who wouldn't be considered "commuters" who would use the bike lanes to bike from one neighborhood to another to shop, eat, etc. Those are not factored into the 4% commuter figure the anti's keep falsely citing.

1. I stand corrected it is only 2% of commuters (thanks PPP)

2. Define “a lot”

3. Why not just use other options available to you? Take transit like the rest of us or bike on side streets?

4. At a time when the city is cutting support to people to prevent eviction and displacement, do you realize how tone deaf you sound? You claim to be a cyclist but I do wonder when the actual last time you touched grass because you are living in a real small bubble.

I don't believe you take transit or patronize local businesses, if you did you wouldn't be complaining about bike lanes. The people who don't want the bike lanes are car commuters who want to be able to speed down Conn Ave at 45mph on their way from their home garage to their work garage and back to their home garage.

What's wrong with that? That's life. Do you expect people from the suburbs to drive to the district line, park, get on a bike and bike the rest of the way to work? How about anyone over 30 who doesn't want to hang their head down as they peddle UP HILL all the way back? Are you crazy? Most people simply will not, ever, bike to work. Most people. Most people don't have time, energy, or a shower waiting for them at work. Most people want to get ready for work at home, not take rumpled clothes out of their bike bag at the office. Most people have busy lives that have more in them than simply riding a bike to and from work. Get a life. Ride your bike if you are fortunate enough to have the time, but don't expect others to become completely different people than they are to suit your need to ride a bike.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You anti-bike people are insane. Why even live in or commute to the city? Go make your life out in the exurbs and leave us alone.

Are you aware that less than 4% of the city population bike commutes? You exist in a very narrow minority.

I am aware that both myself and my children would all commute by bike if there were a safe way to do so. And I live right off Conn Ave.

Also, isn't 4% like 28,000 people? Do you want 30,000 more cars on the street for your commute?

1. It is 4% of COMMUTERS. So more like less than 10,000 people and likely substantially lower.

2. Your math indicates that you believe DC has 700,000 residents which is disqualifying.

3. There is a thing called public transit, which a lot of people use.

There are a lot of people who wouldn't be considered "commuters" who would use the bike lanes to bike from one neighborhood to another to shop, eat, etc. Those are not factored into the 4% commuter figure the anti's keep falsely citing.

1. I stand corrected it is only 2% of commuters (thanks PPP)

2. Define “a lot”

3. Why not just use other options available to you? Take transit like the rest of us or bike on side streets?

4. At a time when the city is cutting support to people to prevent eviction and displacement, do you realize how tone deaf you sound? You claim to be a cyclist but I do wonder when the actual last time you touched grass because you are living in a real small bubble.

I don't believe you take transit or patronize local businesses, if you did you wouldn't be complaining about bike lanes. The people who don't want the bike lanes are car commuters who want to be able to speed down Conn Ave at 45mph on their way from their home garage to their work garage and back to their home garage.

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:Connecticut Avenue is already on a diet now that parking is allowed all day, no rush hour restrictions. That should slow things down the same as bike lanes would.

With the safety argument gone and the transportation argument quite dubious seeing that it is a major public transit corridor there is no rationale at all beyond providing an expensive amenity for a couple dozen of wealthy white people in a city where a lot of basic needs are not being met. This is the kind of thing a city does when it has a growing economy and is flush with cash. That is not the DC of 2023 and thankfully Mayor Bowser and the Council understand that very well.

DC has the same poverty rate as West Virginia

Is West Virginia planning any boondoggle transportation projects that will only benefit a handful of rich people?

Exactly. DC has spent billions of dollars on bike lanes.

Not sure about billions but certainly more than $100 million over the past decade.

This is total nonsense. After repeated requests, someone in the other thread strung together a bunch of projects that allocated funding to a wide range of infra, including road maintenance, and sheepishly tried to claim that the allocations were all for bike lanes. It was patently absurd. If you nothing to contribute other than lies and manipulation, please just be quiet.

Bowser's current budget proposal alone has close to $60 million. $100 million over the past decade is neither absurd nor an exaggeration.

Bike funding routinely exceeds $100 million annually. DC has had bike lanes for 15 years. Things aren’t cheap and the DC government is very generous when it spends other people’s money

show a link for this claim

Here's a sampling from the 2023 budget:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Most of the Washington area bicycling associations annual budget comes from the city. DC pays the bike lobby to lobby the DC government. Surprisingly few real people actually give to waba

can we create a bingo card for this thread? “WABA is funded by DC and controls DDOT” will be a square.

Uh, well you can look at the budget and see for yourself

WABA gets about $100,000 annually in membership dues and almost $1 million from the government. I think that’s called astroturf

Anonymous wrote:Claims not to be “obsessed” while rattling off three posts in a row. LOL.

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:Connecticut Avenue is already on a diet now that parking is allowed all day, no rush hour restrictions. That should slow things down the same as bike lanes would.

With the safety argument gone and the transportation argument quite dubious seeing that it is a major public transit corridor there is no rationale at all beyond providing an expensive amenity for a couple dozen of wealthy white people in a city where a lot of basic needs are not being met. This is the kind of thing a city does when it has a growing economy and is flush with cash. That is not the DC of 2023 and thankfully Mayor Bowser and the Council understand that very well.

DC has the same poverty rate as West Virginia

Is West Virginia planning any boondoggle transportation projects that will only benefit a handful of rich people?

Exactly. DC has spent billions of dollars on bike lanes.

Not sure about billions but certainly more than $100 million over the past decade.

This is total nonsense. After repeated requests, someone in the other thread strung together a bunch of projects that allocated funding to a wide range of infra, including road maintenance, and sheepishly tried to claim that the allocations were all for bike lanes. It was patently absurd. If you nothing to contribute other than lies and manipulation, please just be quiet.

Bowser's current budget proposal alone has close to $60 million. $100 million over the past decade is neither absurd nor an exaggeration.

Bike funding routinely exceeds $100 million annually. DC has had bike lanes for 15 years. Things aren’t cheap and the DC government is very generous when it spends other people’s money

show a link for this claim

Here's a sampling from the 2023 budget:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Most of these are over a six-year span, fwiw. Also, the K Street project involves rebuilding the whole road, including a bus rapid transitway in the middle of the street, so I guess you can say that's primarily a bike project, but if you do, it's sort of hard to take your claim seriously.

This is only part of one year’s worth of funding. DC has been doing this for almost 20 years.

Anonymous wrote:Good grief lone obsessed cyclist person who has posted all these replies, give it a rest already. You are arguing with yourself. Whatever points you think you are making are irrelevant.

Let’s have a dose of reality, shall we?

The City’s budget is deep in the red. The DC Council is prioritizing restoring funding for schools due to change in formulas and emergency rental assistance. Add to that all of the unfunded bills from last FY that never got implemented and the disagreement around funding and implementation of the fare free bus program.

How narcissistic do you have to believe that the city should and will cut any of those things to prioritize bike lanes in upper NW?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally. Having bike lanes on a major artery is insanity.

So the rest of the major cities around the world are insane. mmmmokay.

You’re claiming all other major cities around the world have bike lanes on major roads? Interesting.

Paris is building a lot of bike infrastructure. Many less car-centric cities are already more bike and ped friendly.

Since Paris embarked on this journey, its population has declined from all time highs to the lowest level since the 19th century. Turns out that if you intentionally make it harder for people to get around, eg “traffic calming” and “slow streets”, it makes people’s lives miserable enough to leave in large numbers. Maybe that’s the goal? I don’t know.

Paris Metropopulation:

1850 ~1.5 million
1950 ~6 million
2023 ~11+ million

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally. Having bike lanes on a major artery is insanity.

So the rest of the major cities around the world are insane. mmmmokay.

You’re claiming all other major cities around the world have bike lanes on major roads? Interesting.

Paris is building a lot of bike infrastructure. Many less car-centric cities are already more bike and ped friendly.

Since Paris embarked on this journey, its population has declined from all time highs to the lowest level since the 19th century. Turns out that if you intentionally make it harder for people to get around, eg “traffic calming” and “slow streets”, it makes people’s lives miserable enough to leave in large numbers. Maybe that’s the goal? I don’t know.

Paris Metropopulation:

1850 ~1.5 million
1950 ~6 million
2023 ~11+ million

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:Connecticut Avenue is already on a diet now that parking is allowed all day, no rush hour restrictions. That should slow things down the same as bike lanes would.

With the safety argument gone and the transportation argument quite dubious seeing that it is a major public transit corridor there is no rationale at all beyond providing an expensive amenity for a couple dozen of wealthy white people in a city where a lot of basic needs are not being met. This is the kind of thing a city does when it has a growing economy and is flush with cash. That is not the DC of 2023 and thankfully Mayor Bowser and the Council understand that very well.

DC has the same poverty rate as West Virginia

Is West Virginia planning any boondoggle transportation projects that will only benefit a handful of rich people?

Exactly. DC has spent billions of dollars on bike lanes.

Not sure about billions but certainly more than $100 million over the past decade.

This is total nonsense. After repeated requests, someone in the other thread strung together a bunch of projects that allocated funding to a wide range of infra, including road maintenance, and sheepishly tried to claim that the allocations were all for bike lanes. It was patently absurd. If you nothing to contribute other than lies and manipulation, please just be quiet.

Bowser's current budget proposal alone has close to $60 million. $100 million over the past decade is neither absurd nor an exaggeration.

Bike funding routinely exceeds $100 million annually. DC has had bike lanes for 15 years. Things aren’t cheap and the DC government is very generous when it spends other people’s money

show a link for this claim

Here's a sampling from the 2023 budget:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire people to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million for bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

Most of the Washington area bicycling associations annual budget comes from the city. DC pays the bike lobby to lobby the DC government. Surprisingly few real people actually give to waba

can we create a bingo card for this thread? “WABA is funded by DC and controls DDOT” will be a square.

Uh, well you can look at the budget and see for yourself

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally. Having bike lanes on a major artery is insanity.

So the rest of the major cities around the world are insane. mmmmokay.

You’re claiming all other major cities around the world have bike lanes on major roads? Interesting.

Paris is building a lot of bike infrastructure. Many less car-centric cities are already more bike and ped friendly.

Since Paris embarked on this journey, its population has declined from all time highs to the lowest level since the 19th century. Turns out that if you intentionally make it harder for people to get around, eg “traffic calming” and “slow streets”, it makes people’s lives miserable enough to leave in large numbers. Maybe that’s the goal? I don’t know.