« Sunday Video - Tim Johnson's Ride on Washington 2013 | Main | New CaBi station at 5th & Mass NW »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Townsend didn't directly attack or insult cycling, which can be called an improvement I guess.

In a few short sentences he still manages to pretend the LAB isn't 24 years older than the AAA, demean his constituency for accepting AAA's own rhetoric, ignore the millions (billions?) being spent by DDOT on improving conditions to increase the throughput of narrow roads in an historic municipality that was designed pre-automobile, and he manages to do so while preserving the context of divisiveness and false equivalency.

But yeah, any day he doesn't say cyclists have no place on the streets is a better day than most.

@DaveS: Can you point to examples where Townsend said that cyclists have no place on the street?

When I interviewed him about the R4-11 signs in Maryland, he endorsed them as very useful safety signs. He specifically said that they are needed on 2-lane Lottsford Vista Road where the shoulder stops and it becomes an old narrow country road. Compare: PG-DPW&T which refuses to post such signs on 2-lane roads.

Perhaps you are thinking about other employees of AAA?

"We're not adding any more capacity for automobiles, and that is a great concern for many motorists."

Nonsense, of course we're adding more capacity for motorists. Of course, that capacity is being added in places like WV and rural.

We're not adding capacity in places like DC because there's nowhere to add capacity: as a percentage of the total, nearly every single square inch of space that doesn't already have a home or a business on it has already been allocated to the automobile.

The only way to go from here is down, John.

Any day that Townsend doesn't refer to opponents as retarded is a good day for him.

By the way, http://la.streetsblog.org/2013/04/18/using-editors-to-take-the-green-out-of-the-bike-lane/ shows that maybe the claims that it's really hard to remove green lanes from video are a tad overstated.

JimT: okay, not in so many words. Rather than dig up something "arguably close" or pick on any individual AAA office, I'll drop it back to the statement that the AAA has worked for years to cripple nearly every on-road cycling improvement in DC and to strongly oppose every transportation dollar spent doing anything other than promoting increased driving of private automobiles. One semi-tolerant statement doesn't constitute a change of heart, for a person or an organization.

Not sure if this is new, but it could be of interest for Maryland cyclists:



Any more info on what the damage was to the 28th/Meade station (and whether vandalism or not)?


actually wont the restore L'enfant project to deck over I395 add some capacity for motorists? And some of the plans for SW DC? Adding capacity for motorists in an urban area does not mean buildings limited access highways, or widening roads, but improving street connectivity, that, while it is often done with walking and biking in mind, in fact DOES add to general lane miles. That occured to me because I was thinking of Fairfax - a lot closer to DC than WVa. There are some additions to road capacity there - both tolled (I495 hot lanes and the I95/I395 project) and untolled (widenings on Gallows, on Rte 29, and elsewhere) - but also, very importantly, the Tysons project, which by cutting streets through former superblocks, will actually add general travel lane miles (though it will mostly support Bike/ped)

Yeah, the 11th Street Bridge and Wilson Bridge both added road capacity in the District. Those are two of the largest projects in the District in the last 10 years. But that doesn't do enough to feed the beast...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader