Forum Index
»
Metropolitan DC Local Politics
anyone else dislike Greater Greater Washington?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It would only be one lane but so what? Except for the AM/PM rush hour CT and WI do just fine handling the existing traffic load and if you eliminated all of the illegal parking you'd have additional capacity (it is rare to not have a lane on CT blocked during rush hour now). But who cares if suburbanites are inconvenienced? |
Anonymous
Because only suburbanites use Connecticut. Right. Got it. |
Anonymous
| GGW has some really fun and interesting stuff for maps, metro and history geeks. But I find some of their policy stuff really lightweight and obvious, while being holier than thou at the same time. But I suppose that is the part that makes them politically relevant (and attractive for sponsors), so, they persist! |
Anonymous
No one said that but they make up the vast majority of traffic on it - I don't think it is an exaggeration that 80% of the traffic on CT is MD drivers and that is true 7 days a week. And a majority of DC residents don't drive to work. In any case in most of these debates about trade-offs the real trade off is trading parking for a bike lane in which case the arguments for a change is even stronger. |
Anonymous
Until you show me a study that says 80 percent of Connecticut traffic is Md drivers, seven days a a week, then yes, that's an exaggeration. My experience says there are a whole lot of DC tags on that road too. Would much rather see improved bus service on the L2/L1, which would move more people than a bike lane and take stress off the red line, but WMATA wants to do away with the L1 and slash service on the L2. GGW could tackle that but it would go against their unstated policy of not doing anything that would ever benefit Ward 3. |
Anonymous
It is a volunteer blog and what they publish is based on what is submitted. And lots has been written about Ward 3, including potential transportation improvements. In any case I agree with you that the Connecticut Avenue bus service should be improved - there should be more service and it should be extended out to connect with the coming Purple Line. But it isn't an either or thing and really the only thing one has to do with the other is they are both on Connecticut Avenue. But I stand behind the statement about 80% of the cars being from MD - that is true on my sidestreet that parallels CT and is also my observation on other streets in Upper NW so when you are driving look around at how many of the cars are not from DC and it is a lot. Even Military Road which you no doubt know is an E-W road has far more MD plates than DC plates on it every day of the week. |
Anonymous
WMATA is cutting bus service on CT Ave, which is all the more reason to add bike capacity. I know several people who would bike every day if they had a safe way of doing it. Right now, the combination of side streets or Rock Creek are untenable. |
Anonymous
It really isn't a reason to add bike capacity, no. We should be adding bus capacity to move more people, not strangle that service altogether, which is what is in the works with service cutbacks combined with any plan to take away lanes the buses use to maneuver. |
Anonymous
We should be taking away parking spaces and using our roads to move people not store cars all day - that is the ultimate conflict here. We should increase bus service and add bike lanes. |
Anonymous
|
One only need to stand at the corner of McKinley and Connecticut Ave during the morning or evening rush hour to understand how much commuter volume the road carries. Sure, there are DC residents who use the street, but I agree with the PP above who suggested it is likely 80% of the car traffic.
These are cars that are using the street as a highway eventhough the commercial areas are our neighborhood main streets. End the reversible lanes, add bike lanes and a median and make our city more livable. |
Anonymous
| GGW is like a cool sandwich shop that opened up in Petworth a decade ago but now has stale bread and uses the same ingredients you can find at Au Bon Pain. |
Anonymous
This. |
Anonymous
Again based on what is posted on the blog what is your evidence that this is true? Or even implied? Do think developers are big fans of their push on affordable housing? As I posted yesterday you have to go back more than a month to find a post about an individual development proposal. |
Anonymous
I'm sure you think you are clever but you are not. And I doubt you've ever even been to Petworth. |
Anonymous
So like, in Alexandria, Mayor Silberberg, who has made her career fighting "corruption" by pushing for stopping contributions to campaigns from developers, has accepted contributions from two local residents who had a case before the Council - opposing a development near their house. That directly effected their financial interests. Fact is NIMBYs will use every lever they can - campaign contributions, real and (yes) fake neighborhood associations, lawsuits, blogs, anon posts here, to protect their own financial interests in making housing scarce among other things. I kind of think its GOOD that developers are a countervailing force. (though I also do not think developer $ have change GGW - Dave Alpert had the same opinions when no one had ever heard of him) |