Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

Through-traffic commuters are a menace. They dangerously speed through residential neighborhoods like they were on a highway.

Or a through street, which they are. Not my fault you live on peoples way to work and conveniently so. Don’t worry all those no turns during rush hour will be 100% obeyed…. Or it will just keep a few cars out of the area making it more enticing and open for the cut though drivers to make up time.

Through street or not, you need to observe traffic laws and a huge number of commuters like yourself (you probably included) aren't. That alone justifies a crackdown.

I’ll gladly pay a couple hundred dollars a year in photo tickets or citations for the sweet sweet satisfaction of blasting to work in an M5, hell parking costs way more and it is all just the price of doing business. It’s like the express lanes on 495, pay a little bit and go a bunch faster. Besides I can’t remember the last time I got pulled over by a DC cop. Even when I did years ago those lazy no-nothings would just say sorry sir and to slow down. Last time was on western in chevy chase after rolling through a couple of stop signs and all he wanted to do was tell me how many important people he had caught and let go with warnings. I actually go a stop sign camera ticket once in AU park a few years ago but haven’t seen one of those since. But at the end of the day one has to drive though someone’s neighborhood to get to Georgetown hospital, why not pick the empty roads with the self righteous people? It sort of makes my day to turn on the sport exhaust and get people all huffy and puffy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

Through-traffic commuters are a menace. They dangerously speed through residential neighborhoods like they were on a highway.

Or a through street, which they are. Not my fault you live on peoples way to work and conveniently so. Don’t worry all those no turns during rush hour will be 100% obeyed…. Or it will just keep a few cars out of the area making it more enticing and open for the cut though drivers to make up time.

Through street or not, you need to observe traffic laws and a huge number of commuters like yourself (you probably included) aren't. That alone justifies a crackdown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

Through-traffic commuters are a menace. They dangerously speed through residential neighborhoods like they were on a highway.

Or a through street, which they are. Not my fault you live on peoples way to work and conveniently so. Don’t worry all those no turns during rush hour will be 100% obeyed…. Or it will just keep a few cars out of the area making it more enticing and open for the cut though drivers to make up time.

Through street or not, you need to observe traffic laws and a huge number of commuters like yourself (you probably included) aren't. That alone justifies a crackdown.

Anonymous wrote:21 pages in and I honestly don't understand this thread. All this kvetching about bike lanes, but outside of the peak of rush hour (and in particular at the times when OP threatens to stop spending their money), driving in DC isn't even that congested! The issue for drivers is and has always been parking, ease of driving barely matters in comparison.

I don't think this thread was ever about substantive arguments. It's just easier to be all "who's side are you on" about driving when you have an identifiable enemy in the form of the bike lane and/or the speeding driver. No one here is proposing how they will make parking more convenient because that's hard, and they don't want to actually do the work, they just want to complain.

OP, if the free market isn't providing parking that is convenient and cheap enough for you, what do you propose we do about it? Government-owned garages? Eminent domain to tear down empty office buildings are convert them to parking? The only big parking policies I'm aware of are parking minimums for new apartment buildings, but it's not city apartment dwellers who seem to need these additional parking spaces, it's you. So, what's your strategy? We're all ears.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

It's not false. There were vehicle restrictions in some parts of German cities all the way back in the 1980s when I lived there. That's decades. London and other cities began putting emissions-specific restrictions in place beginning in the early 2000s. Either way, dozens and dozens of European cities have definitely had various types of vehicle restrictions in place for 5-10 or more years or more and there's no "cratering" trend in those cities as the pp claimed would happen.

It’s hard to take these kinds of sentiments seriously. Yes, Frankfurt restricts traffic in the Old Town. It’s not designed for cars. No, Frankfurt does not close or remove lanes to cars in the business district, except for maybe a block or two near the central plaza.

Similarly DC has closed Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House for decades. It doesn’t prove any point and I guess that you understand this? As I said, it’s not clear.

What DC is doing is unique and unprecedented.

No, it isn't unique or unprecedented.

Please provide me an example of another city removing travel lanes in their central business districts not for public transit?

What are you prattling on about? DC added bike lanes, yes. But they WERE NOT converted to bicycle-only streets. There are still lanes for vehicular traffic. Many other cities around the world have also been adding bicycle lanes too. It's not at all unprecedented or unique, nor is it as extreme as you keep desperately trying to make it out to be. Stop making up nonsense just because you think DC streets should be six lane highways solely dedicated to commuters like you.

If anything, DC's measures are significantly LESS restrictive to traffic than European cities. PP is off his rocker trying to claim DC is somehow extreme, radical and unprecedented.

DP but here to tell you that you and the PP l, if you are different people, are lame.

You got called out and are trying to change the subject. LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

Through-traffic commuters are a menace. They dangerously speed through residential neighborhoods like they were on a highway.

Or a through street, which they are. Not my fault you live on peoples way to work and conveniently so. Don’t worry all those no turns during rush hour will be 100% obeyed…. Or it will just keep a few cars out of the area making it more enticing and open for the cut though drivers to make up time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

Netherlands was also quite car-centric till the 70's. Several deaths, including of children, galvanized a movement and they went a different direction for "decades."

Pedestrians going to pedestrian, maybe correcting that smug look off your face as you stare down the 3800 pound missile barreling your way might help. Your self-righteousofway matters not to physics and as long as the driver is sober and not egregiously speeding, they will be fine. Bikers I’m talking to you

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

It's not false. There were vehicle restrictions in some parts of German cities all the way back in the 1980s when I lived there. That's decades. London and other cities began putting emissions-specific restrictions in place beginning in the early 2000s. Either way, dozens and dozens of European cities have definitely had various types of vehicle restrictions in place for 5-10 or more years or more and there's no "cratering" trend in those cities as the pp claimed would happen.

It’s hard to take these kinds of sentiments seriously. Yes, Frankfurt restricts traffic in the Old Town. It’s not designed for cars. No, Frankfurt does not close or remove lanes to cars in the business district, except for maybe a block or two near the central plaza.

Similarly DC has closed Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House for decades. It doesn’t prove any point and I guess that you understand this? As I said, it’s not clear.

What DC is doing is unique and unprecedented.

No, it isn't unique or unprecedented.

Please provide me an example of another city removing travel lanes in their central business districts not for public transit?

What are you prattling on about? DC added bike lanes, yes. But they WERE NOT converted to bicycle-only streets. There are still lanes for vehicular traffic. Many other cities around the world have also been adding bicycle lanes too. It's not at all unprecedented or unique, nor is it as extreme as you keep desperately trying to make it out to be. Stop making up nonsense just because you think DC streets should be six lane highways solely dedicated to commuters like you.

If anything, DC's measures are significantly LESS restrictive to traffic than European cities. PP is off his rocker trying to claim DC is somehow extreme, radical and unprecedented.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

It's not false. There were vehicle restrictions in some parts of German cities all the way back in the 1980s when I lived there. That's decades. London and other cities began putting emissions-specific restrictions in place beginning in the early 2000s. Either way, dozens and dozens of European cities have definitely had various types of vehicle restrictions in place for 5-10 or more years or more and there's no "cratering" trend in those cities as the pp claimed would happen.

It’s hard to take these kinds of sentiments seriously. Yes, Frankfurt restricts traffic in the Old Town. It’s not designed for cars. No, Frankfurt does not close or remove lanes to cars in the business district, except for maybe a block or two near the central plaza.

Similarly DC has closed Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House for decades. It doesn’t prove any point and I guess that you understand this? As I said, it’s not clear.

What DC is doing is unique and unprecedented.

No, it isn't unique or unprecedented.

Please provide me an example of another city removing travel lanes in their central business districts not for public transit?

What are you prattling on about? DC added bike lanes, yes. But they WERE NOT converted to bicycle-only streets. There are still lanes for vehicular traffic. Many other cities around the world have also been adding bicycle lanes too. It's not at all unprecedented or unique, nor is it as extreme as you keep desperately trying to make it out to be. Stop making up nonsense just because you think DC streets should be six lane highways solely dedicated to commuters like you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

It's not false. There were vehicle restrictions in some parts of German cities all the way back in the 1980s when I lived there. That's decades. London and other cities began putting emissions-specific restrictions in place beginning in the early 2000s. Either way, dozens and dozens of European cities have definitely had various types of vehicle restrictions in place for 5-10 or more years or more and there's no "cratering" trend in those cities as the pp claimed would happen.

It’s hard to take these kinds of sentiments seriously. Yes, Frankfurt restricts traffic in the Old Town. It’s not designed for cars. No, Frankfurt does not close or remove lanes to cars in the business district, except for maybe a block or two near the central plaza.

Similarly DC has closed Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House for decades. It doesn’t prove any point and I guess that you understand this? As I said, it’s not clear.

What DC is doing is unique and unprecedented.

No, it isn't unique or unprecedented.

Please provide me an example of another city removing travel lanes in their central business districts not for public transit?

Anonymous wrote:You're legally required to be in full control of that 3800 pound missile at all times and to yield right of way to pedestrians and cyclists. You threaten to run over or so much as graze them with your car and you are likely going to be in deep caca.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

Through-traffic commuters are a menace. They dangerously speed through residential neighborhoods like they were on a highway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I chuckle when my friends in AU park brag on one hand about their proximity and urban like grid pattern streets and then talk out the other side of their mouths about all the people cutting through their neighborhood on those grid streets to get downtown. What did they think would happen? That’s why cul-de-sacs cost more right?

This is what I don't get. I prefer 100% the grid layout. But then I see all these articles about how they need to reduce or cut traffic because people drive down the streets. That's the point!

I feel like a lot of these people want to live like they're on a cul de sac but still have the grid.

Just because it's a grid pattern doesn't mean you should be flying through those neighborhoods like a maniac.

It also doesn't help that navigation apps like Waze and Google Maps don't do an adequately good enough jobs at discriminating between arterials which can handle traffic volumes versus residential side streets. That also happens in the suburbs, too. So now the trend is to add speed bumps everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many European cities where you cannot bring your personal car into the downtown area or have limited schedules where it's allowed, as measures to reduce rush hour congestion, improve safety, improve air quality and promote bicycling, pedestrian and mass transit. They've been doing it for decades. And they are not "cratering" as a result.

This is false.

Paris is doing it big time now.

The other PP said “decades”. Which is false.

It's not false. There were vehicle restrictions in some parts of German cities all the way back in the 1980s when I lived there. That's decades. London and other cities began putting emissions-specific restrictions in place beginning in the early 2000s. Either way, dozens and dozens of European cities have definitely had various types of vehicle restrictions in place for 5-10 or more years or more and there's no "cratering" trend in those cities as the pp claimed would happen.

It’s hard to take these kinds of sentiments seriously. Yes, Frankfurt restricts traffic in the Old Town. It’s not designed for cars. No, Frankfurt does not close or remove lanes to cars in the business district, except for maybe a block or two near the central plaza.

Similarly DC has closed Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House for decades. It doesn’t prove any point and I guess that you understand this? As I said, it’s not clear.

What DC is doing is unique and unprecedented.

No, it isn't unique or unprecedented.