Likes Likes:  25
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Little Falls Parkway road diet ending, CCT to be re-routed to stoplight

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    S. Arlington
    Posts
    328
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huskerdont View Post
    The statement is completely irrelevant to the subject though. That old canard is used almost every time there's a discussion of bicyclists to justify whatever action some group wants to take, but the fact is, this intersection isn't about just bicyclists; it's runners, walkers in general, dog walkers, people with strollers (not a cliche--the last time I went through there, I slowed and waited behind a pair as they crossed), kids. So they're using the easy hatred of "lawless cyclists" to make the trail more dangerous for everyone, just so they can drive through there more quickly. The quote is from a neighborhood association that is not really within walking distance of the intersection; their only interest is in their driving through there. If they truly gave an eff about the safety of the runners and pedestrians they mention in the rest of the quote, they wouldn't be trying to make that area of the trail more dangerous for their own convenience, but they are.
    I was happy to read in the Post recently that more people actually do blame drivers than cyclists and pedestrians for our unsafe roads. Reading anonymous comments online, you'd think cyclists were at fault for most everything, with the odd pedestrian looking at his or her phone responsible for the rest.
    Agreed... I'm not saying it is a good thing the diet is being ended, nor saying that the C.A. is accurate in their broad blame.
    Just expressing no surprise whatsoever that the C.A. is up in arms "because of cyclists" who exhibit bad behavior, as their most convenient excuse.
    The whole universe of cyclists gets painted with the same bad brush in this case. Regardless of the (hopefully larger) set of cyclists fully mindful of the rules and using the trail responsibly; but all of those are forgotten, painting so broadly to justify an action.
    And while the (let's say) "renegade cyclists" can and do escalate risk to everyone else, so can any other variety of of trail user, through 'bad trail-user behavior'. They just tend to be slower moving, and thus likely not perceived as any nuisance to the original complainers -- who you get the sense, are outraged every time a cyclist passes them on the trail (also seemingly saving their "I had to stop at a crossing" anger just for cyclists, not for pedestrians, skaters, etc!)

  2. Likes huskerdont liked this post
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The banks of Lubber Run
    Posts
    473
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChristoB50 View Post
    Just expressing no surprise whatsoever that the C.A. is up in arms "because of cyclists" who exhibit bad behavior, as their most convenient excuse.
    The whole universe of cyclists gets painted with the same bad brush in this case. Regardless of the (hopefully larger) set of cyclists fully mindful of the rules and using the trail responsibly; but all of those are forgotten, painting so broadly to justify an action.
    Here's the thing though. Even if you or I could wave a magic wand and get every cyclist to operate according the regs and the Universal Truths of Kindness (TM), the C.A. would still say they want what they want because of all those lawless cyclists.

  4. Likes ChristoB50, Steve O, KWL, creadinger liked this post
  5. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mostly Frankfurt am Main with time in Dominion Hills
    Posts
    5,610
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by secstate View Post
    Many of you have probably seen this decision by the Montgomery County Planning Board to revert Little Falls Parkway to four lanes and divert the CCT to a nearby stoplight. Itís an astonishing move given the volume of bike and pedestrian traffic that goes through there on nice days. Some communities would see the trail as a resource to be enhanced but apparently itís just an annoyance. Note well, itís all our fault.

    https://www.thewashcycle.com/2019/06...-parkway-.html



    Grr.
    And neither the George Washington Parkway nor the Clara Barton Parkway were built as commuter routes either. The correct answer is, "So what?" All were paid with taxpayer dollars on PUBLIC lands, so the neighborhood NIMBYs need to get off their high horse.

    I'm not going to bother to do any actual research, but most days I would imagine that there is more pedestrian/cycle traffic on the CCT than there is motor vehicle traffic on Little Falls Parkway. Don't you just love making this stuff up?

  6. Likes LhasaCM, Sunyata, creadinger, Steve O liked this post
  7. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Alexandria
    Posts
    1,325
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    So is that the answer? I recognize it would be annoying given the bad connection at Mass Ave... but should cyclists just stat taking Little Falls Parkway all the way down to Mass Ave and back instead of the trail??

    If the NIMBYs don't want us on their precious 'local, noncommuter' trail we'll take the road and while we're at it maybe we'll take the lane. Some of them may see how useful the trail actually is for everyone.

  8. Likes consularrider, huskerdont liked this post

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •