D.C. has built more than 100 miles of bicycle lanes over the past 25 years, including about 20 in the last five years, making it one of the most bike-friendly cities in the country. The Capital Bikeshare program that started in 2010 hits ridership records every month. But every new lane leads to opposition, and earlier this year after forceful pushback, the city abandoned a long-gestating plan to put bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue in wealthier Northwest.
That fueled both hope and more outrage among opponents of the Northeast plans. “What stopped Connecticut Avenue … so we can know what to say?” one attendee at the Nov. 6 meeting said to applause. Supporters of the project also are watching closely to see whether the city, which is working on a new “strategic” bike-lane plan, is willing to withstand political pressure against another road redesign.
…
In the 1960s, Northeast residents successfully blocked a plan to extend Interstate 95 through their neighborhood, part of a broader city movement against “White men’s roads through Black men’s bedrooms,” as the slogan coined by activist Sammie Abbott described it. Some opponents of the road diet see their activism as part of the same fight against outside interference.
…
D.C. Department of Transportation Director Sharon Kershbaum told the crowd at the meeting that her office has gotten hundreds of complaints about speeding and running red lights on the avenue; in a survey, 86 percent of residents said it was not safe. There are six speed cameras and one red light camera on the road, but as a DDOT employee acknowledged, drivers often slow down for those cameras and then speed up again. And D.C. has limited ability to enforce those tickets, particularly against out-of-state drivers.
That 1960s defeat of 95? Thank Takoma Park for that. Of course, these days, Takoma Park won't so much as lift a finger to keep absurd numbers of people from driving fast or loud down our...
That 1960s defeat of 95? Thank Takoma Park for that.
Of course, these days, Takoma Park won't so much as lift a finger to keep absurd numbers of people from driving fast or loud down our neighborhood streets. Meanwhile, DC has a 20mph default speed limit and, in richer areas, many "no turn between X and Y" times.
What did those people say to block the bike lanes? Probably something along the lines of "look at all of the tax dollars we pay because we're some of your wealthiest residents so leave us be."
Also, very pro-bike. More bike lanes!
Also:
bike lanes inspire particular ire among longtime residents who see them as amenities for wealthier transplants moving in
That's legitimate.
And also speeding and reckless driving have climbed enormously since COVID. I can't explain it. Yet the police acknowledge it as well.
And then now we get the Fast n' Furious LARPers who literally take over intersections and streets to do donuts with a crowd of observers.
I honestly don't think the "amenities for rich people" thing is legitimate. Biking is far cheaper than owning a car, and is still very practical if you live in Northeast DC and work in a different...
I honestly don't think the "amenities for rich people" thing is legitimate. Biking is far cheaper than owning a car, and is still very practical if you live in Northeast DC and work in a different part of the city. I live in DC and I regularly bike from NE to NW or NE to downtown, and of course you can also combine biking with DC's very solid subway and bus network. If you don't have a bike and can't afford one, DC has a very good bikeshare program that low-income residents can use for $5/year (https://capitalbikeshare.com/pricing/for-all).
DC has a major, worsening problem with drivers killing people (https://archive.is/Onqh4), and for the most part that isn't concentrated where the "wealthier transplants" live.
While I agree with your premise, I do not agree with your conclusion about how it plays out in NE DC—speaking from experience. I've cycled a lot these past 3 months. While I do see some bike...
While I agree with your premise, I do not agree with your conclusion about how it plays out in NE DC—speaking from experience.
I've cycled a lot these past 3 months. While I do see some bike commuters in NE, where I do most of my cycling, there really aren't that many compared to the number of white folks cycling for what appears to be exercise.
Yes but isn't that partly because the infrastructure is so bad right now? Open Google maps and turn on the biking layer - NE and over the Anacostis are deserts compared to the rest of the city....
Yes but isn't that partly because the infrastructure is so bad right now? Open Google maps and turn on the biking layer - NE and over the Anacostis are deserts compared to the rest of the city. Obviously if we only support this stuff in rich neighborhoods and tourist areas then it's going to feel like a wealthy amenity, but it doesn't have to be that way.
Also it's not just bikes, I see a decent number of people commuting on electric scooters. That's also much safer and more practical with good bike lanes.
Electric scooters on bike trails are a menace. I'd say that a third to a half of them use the trail like they own it. They go top speed. They don't use bells or announce themselves. They're...
Electric scooters on bike trails are a menace. I'd say that a third to a half of them use the trail like they own it. They go top speed. They don't use bells or announce themselves. They're dangerous.
Paths aren't for motorized vehicles. I use an e-bike, yes, but as a bike. I pedal. I don't maintain an average speed to 20+ MPH. I use a bell a lot to warn people long before passing. I slow down and stop if I must for the safety of others.a
Also, no, NE is actually not bad. There are plenty of roads where the traffic is light and they are safe. 3rd is one. Kansas is another. Also, the MBT is amazing and runs all the way from Ft Totten to Union Station.
Look at Strava. There are plenty of places people ride here.
The MBT is busy, for a trail. However, it's not "DC busy". It's heavily used. There are commuters. Again, it's still not at all what you would hope for in terms of volume. If it were, it would be almost unusable.
I want cycling to be more adopted. And I do see some non-white folks on the trails, mostly using ebikes. There just aren't many. And this is also a case of be careful what you wish for.
The more people who use the trails, the greater number of unsafe people who will be among them. They're there already. And you can do a lot of harm with a scooter or bike at 20+ MPH. I've seen some unsafe behaviors on bike lanes downtown. People are impatient on all modes of travel and that makes them dangerous.
Could be that commuters take direct routes and spend less time cycling? It would make sense if wealthier people are more likely to bike for leisure and thus spend more time out on their bikes. Not...
Could be that commuters take direct routes and spend less time cycling? It would make sense if wealthier people are more likely to bike for leisure and thus spend more time out on their bikes. Not that that's a bad thing (eyes on the street are great for public safety).
Unlikely. The routes I take are ideal for commuters. While there are some, there really aren't even that many cyclists at any given time with fewer commuting.
Unlikely. The routes I take are ideal for commuters. While there are some, there really aren't even that many cyclists at any given time with fewer commuting.
A sad but consistent cycle: Make bike lanes neighborhood value increases rich people move in rich people gentrify the neighborhood and many other local policies rich people decide to take down...
A sad but consistent cycle:
Make bike lanes
neighborhood value increases
rich people move in
rich people gentrify the neighborhood and many other local policies
rich people decide to take down bike lanes
worst of both worlds.
Don't really know a solution to it. It's not like those bike routes are taken down for public transit nor otherwise other walkable architectural design.
Bike lanes don't cause gentrification. Not building enough housing to meet demand causes spiking home values and displacement. Building enough housing to support existing and new residents is the...
Bike lanes don't cause gentrification. Not building enough housing to meet demand causes spiking home values and displacement. Building enough housing to support existing and new residents is the solution.
If bike lanes pump up property values so much (which I am not convinced is the case), perhaps that's the market saying that people want bike lanes and nice walkable places. The solution is...
If bike lanes pump up property values so much (which I am not convinced is the case), perhaps that's the market saying that people want bike lanes and nice walkable places.
The solution is obviously not to stop building nice things, the solution is to build so many nice things that it stops being something special! Especially when it comes to bike lanes, which are practically free compared to any other kind of transportation infrastructure.
I feel like they're two different groups. The people who've managed to lock down a house/property don't like seeing the value go down (or even staying flat for that matter), but the people trying...
I feel like they're two different groups. The people who've managed to lock down a house/property don't like seeing the value go down (or even staying flat for that matter), but the people trying to break out of renting feel dismayed as the goal post for how much they need saved to buy a house keeps getting moved away from them. Despite being a home owner, I'm firmly in "house prices need to chill out and I don't care if it appreciates in value because the financial outcome is still substantially better than renting," but I also refuse to let myself see my home as an investment. That's not really a popular opinion or outlook for a lot of home owners.
Where have you seen this happen? I've never heard of this happening, and I can't find any evidence that bike lanes cause displacement/gentrification or any instances of rich people removing bike...
Where have you seen this happen? I've never heard of this happening, and I can't find any evidence that bike lanes cause displacement/gentrification or any instances of rich people removing bike lanes.
Takoma Park seems to be the rare exception that way. We love our bike lanes here. Though we're not Bethesda-rich here. And economically we're a mixed bag by design—though seemingly some of the...
Takoma Park seems to be the rare exception that way. We love our bike lanes here. Though we're not Bethesda-rich here. And economically we're a mixed bag by design—though seemingly some of the residents would change that.
So far, the seeming gentrifies seem mostly held at bay. Though I could rant about the possibly not so subtle ways lower income residents may be getting shuffled out in the name of "development".
That’s probably got something to do with it, but I noticed in myself that I had gotten so used to there being almost no traffic during the lockdown that once it was over I was driving quite...
That’s probably got something to do with it, but I noticed in myself that I had gotten so used to there being almost no traffic during the lockdown that once it was over I was driving quite recklessly for a normal level of traffic.
I made a deliberate effort to stop doing that, but I suspect that a certain number of people just felt entitled to keep driving as if there was no one else on the road, because a certain number of people are inconsiderate jackasses.
From the article:
…
…
That 1960s defeat of 95? Thank Takoma Park for that.
Of course, these days, Takoma Park won't so much as lift a finger to keep absurd numbers of people from driving fast or loud down our neighborhood streets. Meanwhile, DC has a 20mph default speed limit and, in richer areas, many "no turn between X and Y" times.
What did those people say to block the bike lanes? Probably something along the lines of "look at all of the tax dollars we pay because we're some of your wealthiest residents so leave us be."
Also, very pro-bike. More bike lanes!
Also:
That's legitimate.
And also speeding and reckless driving have climbed enormously since COVID. I can't explain it. Yet the police acknowledge it as well.
And then now we get the Fast n' Furious LARPers who literally take over intersections and streets to do donuts with a crowd of observers.
I honestly don't think the "amenities for rich people" thing is legitimate. Biking is far cheaper than owning a car, and is still very practical if you live in Northeast DC and work in a different part of the city. I live in DC and I regularly bike from NE to NW or NE to downtown, and of course you can also combine biking with DC's very solid subway and bus network. If you don't have a bike and can't afford one, DC has a very good bikeshare program that low-income residents can use for $5/year (https://capitalbikeshare.com/pricing/for-all).
DC has a major, worsening problem with drivers killing people (https://archive.is/Onqh4), and for the most part that isn't concentrated where the "wealthier transplants" live.
While I agree with your premise, I do not agree with your conclusion about how it plays out in NE DC—speaking from experience.
I've cycled a lot these past 3 months. While I do see some bike commuters in NE, where I do most of my cycling, there really aren't that many compared to the number of white folks cycling for what appears to be exercise.
Yes but isn't that partly because the infrastructure is so bad right now? Open Google maps and turn on the biking layer - NE and over the Anacostis are deserts compared to the rest of the city. Obviously if we only support this stuff in rich neighborhoods and tourist areas then it's going to feel like a wealthy amenity, but it doesn't have to be that way.
Also it's not just bikes, I see a decent number of people commuting on electric scooters. That's also much safer and more practical with good bike lanes.
Electric scooters on bike trails are a menace. I'd say that a third to a half of them use the trail like they own it. They go top speed. They don't use bells or announce themselves. They're dangerous.
Paths aren't for motorized vehicles. I use an e-bike, yes, but as a bike. I pedal. I don't maintain an average speed to 20+ MPH. I use a bell a lot to warn people long before passing. I slow down and stop if I must for the safety of others.a
Also, no, NE is actually not bad. There are plenty of roads where the traffic is light and they are safe. 3rd is one. Kansas is another. Also, the MBT is amazing and runs all the way from Ft Totten to Union Station.
Look at Strava. There are plenty of places people ride here.
The MBT is busy, for a trail. However, it's not "DC busy". It's heavily used. There are commuters. Again, it's still not at all what you would hope for in terms of volume. If it were, it would be almost unusable.
I want cycling to be more adopted. And I do see some non-white folks on the trails, mostly using ebikes. There just aren't many. And this is also a case of be careful what you wish for.
The more people who use the trails, the greater number of unsafe people who will be among them. They're there already. And you can do a lot of harm with a scooter or bike at 20+ MPH. I've seen some unsafe behaviors on bike lanes downtown. People are impatient on all modes of travel and that makes them dangerous.
Could be that commuters take direct routes and spend less time cycling? It would make sense if wealthier people are more likely to bike for leisure and thus spend more time out on their bikes. Not that that's a bad thing (eyes on the street are great for public safety).
Unlikely. The routes I take are ideal for commuters. While there are some, there really aren't even that many cyclists at any given time with fewer commuting.
A sad but consistent cycle:
Don't really know a solution to it. It's not like those bike routes are taken down for public transit nor otherwise other walkable architectural design.
Bike lanes don't cause gentrification. Not building enough housing to meet demand causes spiking home values and displacement. Building enough housing to support existing and new residents is the solution.
If bike lanes pump up property values so much (which I am not convinced is the case), perhaps that's the market saying that people want bike lanes and nice walkable places.
The solution is obviously not to stop building nice things, the solution is to build so many nice things that it stops being something special! Especially when it comes to bike lanes, which are practically free compared to any other kind of transportation infrastructure.
It's kind of funny that people hate their property values going down, but also hate their property values going upup.
I feel like they're two different groups. The people who've managed to lock down a house/property don't like seeing the value go down (or even staying flat for that matter), but the people trying to break out of renting feel dismayed as the goal post for how much they need saved to buy a house keeps getting moved away from them. Despite being a home owner, I'm firmly in "house prices need to chill out and I don't care if it appreciates in value because the financial outcome is still substantially better than renting," but I also refuse to let myself see my home as an investment. That's not really a popular opinion or outlook for a lot of home owners.
Haven't heard of this. In the bay area, bike lanes seem pretty persistent? What's an example?
Where have you seen this happen? I've never heard of this happening, and I can't find any evidence that bike lanes cause displacement/gentrification or any instances of rich people removing bike lanes.
Takoma Park seems to be the rare exception that way. We love our bike lanes here. Though we're not Bethesda-rich here. And economically we're a mixed bag by design—though seemingly some of the residents would change that.
So far, the seeming gentrifies seem mostly held at bay. Though I could rant about the possibly not so subtle ways lower income residents may be getting shuffled out in the name of "development".
Long COVID messing with brain functioning. It's like everybody is drunk all of the time.
That’s probably got something to do with it, but I noticed in myself that I had gotten so used to there being almost no traffic during the lockdown that once it was over I was driving quite recklessly for a normal level of traffic.
I made a deliberate effort to stop doing that, but I suspect that a certain number of people just felt entitled to keep driving as if there was no one else on the road, because a certain number of people are inconsiderate jackasses.
Mirror: https://archive.is/zCsqI