Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

This is priceless. Thank you.

If by priceless you mean word salad, then yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

This is priceless. Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

DP but I’m pretty sure “face check” was a typo for “fact check,” since face checks are not a thing and fact checks are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

DP but I’m pretty sure “face check” was a typo for “fact check,” since face checks are not a thing and fact checks are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

You'll "face check" me really? Ok, I believe you aggro lycra man. Come try me. It'll be the best police report ever. Officer I don't know what to see, this crazy short white guy with a man bun assaulted me because I think eliminating two lanes of Connecticut Ave is a bad idea. I think he hates someone named Nick and is mentally unstable.

How many bicyclists use Connecticut Avenue?
How many millions is being spent on a plan that nobody wants and harms everyone?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

I'm still laughing at your BS about 300 bicyclists in DC and billions of dollars spent on bike lanes. If you said the sky was blue I'd still face check you. Face it, you're a crank. Not even a good one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Wow, are you having a mental breakdown? This isn't complicated, controversial or even disputed.

Is the purple line the biggest mass transit project in the region right now?
Is a purple line stop being built on Connecticut?
Would people that live along Connecticut Ave use Connecticut Ave to get to the purple line stop on Connecticut Ave?

What facts are wrong? Please do share. There's no need to be silent just as there is no need to think closing two lanes of Connecticut Avenue is a good idea just because you enjoy lycra.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

You've made up and repeated so many "facts" that are blatantly ridiculous that I don't trust a word out of your keyboard. You are a joke, the least funny kind. And no one respects you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does snow removal work with these protected bike lanes? Do plows launch the snow 15’ over the bike lane onto the sidewalk? That doesn’t seem possible or safe. So it seems like we’d be down to one lane in each direction during snow events. What does this mean for first responders? Has anyone thought about this?

First responders are absolutely consulted on new street designs such as bike lanes. There are many experts who provide input into these things- firemen (they have distinct requirement s because of size and turning radius of trucks); traffic engineers, etc. The reason these things take so long is because they are being studied and analyzed before being put in

Are they? Let's see their report then. How much will response time increase due to the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets?

If you really cared about first responder response time you'd ban rush hour traffic.

This has to be the dumbest comment yet.

It's a simple question. You, or one of your WABA buddies, have stated that Fire/EMS/Police have studied the impact of closing 1/3 of Connecticut Ave on their ability to provide essential services and implied that they have approved it. If so, what is the estimated impact on response times of deliberately increasing congestion by 33% on their main route and exponentially increasing it on the side streets?

This impacts everyone negatively. I don't think a 10 minute increase in response times for seizures, heart attacks, strokes, burglary, and fires is worth the trade off. You seem to think it is. So let's see the numbers. What size decrease in the effectiveness of emergency response is worth it to you?


The truth is that emergency services aren't actually asked for impact assesments. They're only asked if fire trucks still fit. None of the manifest and obvious negative impacts were taken into account before making a decision.

No one asks the emergency services if it's OK for thousands more commuters to decide they'd rather drive than take Metro, either, but it had the same effect. Or is traffic only a problem when you think someone else is causing it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fox5dc.com/news/connecticut-avenue-bike-lane-plan-faces-opposition

They're eliminating two lanes on Connecticut freaking Avenue. That is honestly one of the stupidest decisions ever made by the DC Government.

Is it just me or is it totally insane to promote higher density while intentionally removing transportation infrastructure.

I could see removing a lane for a bus lane, but a bike lane is insane. CT Ave goes up a steep hill. I hear a lot about the Netherlands model. You know what the Netherlands doesn’t have? Hills. By all means turn the Old City, that’s mostly flat, into a bike utopia. This seems like an intentional plan to make upper CT an undesirable place to live which is consistent with other DC government behaviors, like the housing homeless in apartment buildings and hotels in the same area. I guess the plan is to intentionally impoverish the area so it can be redeveloped?

The city is intentionally making traffic worse because they think that will prompt people to switch to bikes. That's obviously ridiculous. People will just leave or stop going to parts of the city where it's hard to get around.

The idea that I am going to bike to the small businesses along CT Avenue is absurd. In a funny way, adding bike lanes will benefit suburban malls (which I historically have tried to avoid) as one can drive and park and do multiple errands.

If we're going to argue entirely by first-person anecdote, I will chime in to say that I routinely bike to small businesses on Connecticut and Wisconsin avenues, because errands within two miles of my house are the perfect thing to bike to instead of driving.

The bigger issue is that tens of thousands of people use these roads every day. How many people use these bike lanes? Some of these lanes aren't even used by 10 people a day.

I don't know if we have data that shows that bike lanes are used by fewer than 10 people a day. When I bike to work along Connecticut, I usually see more than 10 other people on bikes just when I'm on the road, so I can guarantee that a bike lane there would get more use than that.

There's no question that thousands of people use that road every day. But are we sure that two lanes in each direction, with protected bike lanes, will lead to significantly less use of the road by drivers than the reversible lanes and the parking? Some tradeoff that makes the roads safer and more usable for non-drivers but still leaves most cars able to use the road as they currently do would surely be OK, no? Or is your argument that anything that delays a driver's commute by, say, 4 minutes in total is unacceptable?

Honest question, why can’t bikers ride from their neighborhood to CT Ave and then slap the bike on front of the bus? Or leave it in a locker and jump on the metro? What is so difficult about this? This seems like a solution in search of a problem.

The “safety” case looks even worse when considering that there have been zero accidents involving bicycles even resulting in minor injuries - even accidents not involving cars - so far this year along CT Ave from Kalorama to the District line. Literally none.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why there's so many bike lanes. They make traffic and parking a lot, lot worse, and barely anyone even uses them. It just seems a little crazy.