Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's in everyone's interest -- drivers, pedestrians, cyclists -- to have any much car traffic moving as efficiently as possible on major roads, ie any street named after a state. That's what they were designed for and that's where everyone expects there to be lots of traffic. When we force drivers to start cutting through neighborhoods on side streets because the main arteries are clogged, that's when we're asking for trouble.

+1. And it could be even worse on the weekends when tourists heading to the Zoo get routed by Waze onto Reno and into the neighborhoods. It’s completely foreseeable, sadly. Homeowners on side streets adjacent to Connecticut will get no relief.

It is frustrating how many people commenting on here and the local listserves have no idea what they are talking about - people who are clueless about both the current baseline and what the road will look like in the future.

On weekends CT Ave in the future will in fact not have the same car carrying capacity it has today - it will have a greater car carrying capacity.

Currently on weekends (and 90% of the entire week in fact and the way the road has been the last 50 years outside of rush hour) Connecticut has two travel lanes in each direction.

Under Concept C on weekends (and the remaining 10% of the week) the road will have two travel lanes in each direction.

But for the 90% of the week that is not rush hour the roads carrying capacity will actually be increasing because most intersections will now have queuing pockets for left hand turns which only exist today at a couple of intersections in the corridor.

So today if you drive on CT Ave on a Saturday afternoon even a single car waiting to turn left blocks the entire left lane until he can make a turn, effectively reducing the road to one lane.

If you are as familiar with CT Ave as I am you know that it is pretty common to have left hand turning cars queued up at every single intersection which means that it is common that only one lane of traffic is flowing through intersections and that behind that lane you have block by block clusterfu(ks of cars jumping in and out of the center lane to go around the queued cars and that lane jumping is one of the most common causes of accidents in urban areas.

If you are as familiar with CT Ave as I am you also know that even when there were reversible lanes cars were commonly illegally parked in the curb lane and other cars commonly ignored the rush hour left turn prohibitions and guess what that meant - it meant that even during rush hour CT Ave at intersections was commonly squeezed down to 2 lanes of traffic flowing in each direction.

Under the previous and current rush hour configurations left hand turns were prohibited which in fact made it harder to legally use CT Ave to get to the residential side streets effectively pushing some of those trips onto the side streets, at least for the handful of drivers who actually obeyed the turn restrictions.

In the future during rush hour not only will you be able to park on one-side of CT Ave (that has been prohibited on both sides 6 hours a day during rush hour)but you will be able to turn off of CT Ave to get to your home on a residential side street.

If any of you car dependent luddites had actually read the traffic study you would know that almost all of the projected increases in travel delays for drivers are projected to be on the E-W roads which again if you understood the baseline current conditions would not be a surprise because that is where the delays and subpar levels of service are today which again is not a surprise to anyone with a functioning brain because there is relatively little E-W capacity for moving people whether in cars or on public transportation (or even on bikes) because of the physical barrier of Rock Creek Park.

That is why so many of the car diversions happen outside the neighborhood (opponents keep saying 7000 cars will be diverted onto neighborhood streets but that is not what the traffic study says - it says 7000 cars will find other routes and it estimates the vast majority will find routes completely outside of the CT Ave corridor) and why the impacts on alternate N-S routes in the neighborhood are so minimal - the chokepoints are all for people going E-W and many of those drivers aren't originating near the corridor in the first place and will find an alternate N-S corridor.

In fact if any of you car zealots had read the traffic study you'd know that it actually predicts improved levels of service for almost all of the intersections along CT Avenue because the corridor will be moving fewer cars.

Or to put it in simpler terms this change will negatively impact suburban drivers while positively impacting DC residents, including those who still choose to drive.

Thank you! This is so very true. Through commuters for the whole corridor will have a few minutes added to their commutes. But those who are going east-west, or partially are using the corridor as vehicle drivers will actually see improvements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

This is nothing but commuter porn. Woe is me the DC area driver? Won't someone think of the drivers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's in everyone's interest -- drivers, pedestrians, cyclists -- to have any much car traffic moving as efficiently as possible on major roads, ie any street named after a state. That's what they were designed for and that's where everyone expects there to be lots of traffic. When we force drivers to start cutting through neighborhoods on side streets because the main arteries are clogged, that's when we're asking for trouble.

It is also in everyone's interest to have roads where pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, can move about their business in a safe manner. When a road is designed such that someone operating a car can move fast enough that they overturn it, as happened on Connecticut Avenue earlier this month, that is problematic. I am not sure why anyone would defend the status quo, which is clearly unsafe.

We'd all be better off if the handful of dudes super into bikes would just take the subway.

If I want to go from Chevy Chase to Vace, the Metro isn't really going to help me.

You're in luck! It turns out there is also a city bus system!

It is faster for me to bike. I would just like to do it safely.

Call me crazy but the city shouldnt have to spend billions of dollars and screw up traffic for hundreds of thousands of people because you and a handful of other Bernie bros don't like the bus

PP either has a terrible grasp of numbers or a terrible grasp of the truth but DC does not spend billions on bike and pedestrian infrastructure - in fact it is less than 5% of DDOT's massive budget which is astonishing because most people in DC get around every day in some manner without using a vehicle.

Obviously the city doesnt spend billions in one year, but over the years? Yes, of course it has spend billions. We've had bike lanes in this city for almost 15 years.

No really DC has not spent billions.

I would be shocked if DC has even spent 50 million on bike lanes over the last 10 years.

DC doesn't even have 20 miles of protected bike lanes in the entire city.

Connecticut Avenue is estimated to cost about 8 million for 3 miles but that estimate includes a couple of hawk signals and some pedestrian islands and lots of design work. I'm pretty sure the CP streetscape improvement project is costing more by itself.

Most of the bike lanes we have in DC are just paint and some signs which is to say they are very inexpensive projects - as in like $10-$15000 for an entire project.

Just as an FYI DDOTs FY 2023 capital budget is $650 million, most of which goes towards repaving roads. DDOT has over 200 full time traffic engineers but just 2 staffers who work on bike lanes full time so on the personnel side as well spending on roads just swamps what is spent on bikes.

Uh, well here's a sampling from this year's budget alone:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire a full-time team to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's in everyone's interest -- drivers, pedestrians, cyclists -- to have any much car traffic moving as efficiently as possible on major roads, ie any street named after a state. That's what they were designed for and that's where everyone expects there to be lots of traffic. When we force drivers to start cutting through neighborhoods on side streets because the main arteries are clogged, that's when we're asking for trouble.

+1. And it could be even worse on the weekends when tourists heading to the Zoo get routed by Waze onto Reno and into the neighborhoods. It’s completely foreseeable, sadly. Homeowners on side streets adjacent to Connecticut will get no relief.

Maybe this will encourage more people to use the metro that is conveniently located near the Zoo!
I think the 89 pages of this thread show pretty clearly that it is not in cyclists and pedestrian interest to keep things as they are, but you can keep chatting into the void.

Don't we all know how this movie is going to end? This plan is never going to take effect and, if it does, it will quickly be rescinded. It would be career suicide for city council members to create traffic Armageddon that pisses off hundreds of thousands of people for the sake of, like, nine guys who are really into bikes.

+1

+2. Go on Twitter. Follow Bike Lane Squaters of DC. Behold daily pictures of blocked bike lanes all over the city, INCLUDING the beloved concrete “protected” bike lanes. And you want to bring this junk to Connecticut Ave? Stop hiding behind studies. People can see with their own eyes that it’s not going to work.

I am tempted to go park in a bike lane, take a picture of my own car and sent it to this Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

Only a thousand percent? Why not a million percent? Why not a billion percent? We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years, the government relentlessly promotes them (the government *buys* people bikes) and still hardly rides bikes in this city (just 2 percent according to the Census Bureau). These studies are obviously not worth the paper they're printed on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

The businesses that get get out of their leases are already leaving. What other proof do you need?

[Anonymous]

I see that since GGW did their Friday-night news dump that they are killing their comments section -- the only place to push back on their writers' many, many factual errors -- the GGW mouth-breather have found this thread. Welcome!

Sorry that you can't whine to the mods here when someone factually refutes your whining, but such is life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's in everyone's interest -- drivers, pedestrians, cyclists -- to have any much car traffic moving as efficiently as possible on major roads, ie any street named after a state. That's what they were designed for and that's where everyone expects there to be lots of traffic. When we force drivers to start cutting through neighborhoods on side streets because the main arteries are clogged, that's when we're asking for trouble.

It is also in everyone's interest to have roads where pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, can move about their business in a safe manner. When a road is designed such that someone operating a car can move fast enough that they overturn it, as happened on Connecticut Avenue earlier this month, that is problematic. I am not sure why anyone would defend the status quo, which is clearly unsafe.

We'd all be better off if the handful of dudes super into bikes would just take the subway.

If I want to go from Chevy Chase to Vace, the Metro isn't really going to help me.

You're in luck! It turns out there is also a city bus system!

It is faster for me to bike. I would just like to do it safely.

Call me crazy but the city shouldnt have to spend billions of dollars and screw up traffic for hundreds of thousands of people because you and a handful of other Bernie bros don't like the bus

PP either has a terrible grasp of numbers or a terrible grasp of the truth but DC does not spend billions on bike and pedestrian infrastructure - in fact it is less than 5% of DDOT's massive budget which is astonishing because most people in DC get around every day in some manner without using a vehicle.

Obviously the city doesnt spend billions in one year, but over the years? Yes, of course it has spend billions. We've had bike lanes in this city for almost 15 years.

No really DC has not spent billions.

I would be shocked if DC has even spent 50 million on bike lanes over the last 10 years.

DC doesn't even have 20 miles of protected bike lanes in the entire city.

Connecticut Avenue is estimated to cost about 8 million for 3 miles but that estimate includes a couple of hawk signals and some pedestrian islands and lots of design work. I'm pretty sure the CP streetscape improvement project is costing more by itself.

Most of the bike lanes we have in DC are just paint and some signs which is to say they are very inexpensive projects - as in like $10-$15000 for an entire project.

Just as an FYI DDOTs FY 2023 capital budget is $650 million, most of which goes towards repaving roads. DDOT has over 200 full time traffic engineers but just 2 staffers who work on bike lanes full time so on the personnel side as well spending on roads just swamps what is spent on bikes.

Uh, well here's a sampling from this year's budget alone:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire a full-time team to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

You already posted this about 40 pages ago, and most of it was explained how it wasn't what you are claiming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

The businesses that get get out of their leases are already leaving. What other proof do you need?

Businesses leaving three years before this is implemented are not leaving because of the bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

Only a thousand percent? Why not a million percent? Why not a billion percent? We've had bike lanes in this city for 15 years, the government relentlessly promotes them (the government *buys* people bikes) and still hardly rides bikes in this city (just 2 percent according to the Census Bureau). These studies are obviously not worth the paper they're printed on.

At least they out a number on gow many bicyciists use Connectivut Ave. They estimate 300.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

The businesses that get get out of their leases are already leaving. What other proof do you need?

Businesses leaving three years before this is implemented are not leaving because of the bike lanes.

Most commercial leases are for 5 years. Some even for ten. When our ANC commissioners and the bike mafia hears “lease” they think it’s like the 1 year lease on their rental apartments. There is a reason we have age limits to run for federal offices. Stating to think we need that at the ANC level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

The businesses that get get out of their leases are already leaving. What other proof do you need?

Businesses leaving three years before this is implemented are not leaving because of the bike lanes.

Most commercial leases are for 5 years. Some even for ten. When our ANC commissioners and the bike mafia hears “lease” they think it’s like the 1 year lease on their rental apartments. There is a reason we have age limits to run for federal offices. Stating to think we need that at the ANC level.

This is a great idea - I fully support putting ceilings on how old someone running for office can be. I am sick and tired of being lorded over by a bunch of 70 and 80 year olds!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a commuter from MD so you can hate on me, but in our newly hybrid world, I will come into my DC office much less when these changes go into effect. I will spend a lot less money in DC than I have over the past 20yrs. And I will be driving all over DC neighborhoods when I do have to drive downtown. Especially if Beach Drive remains closed. I'm sure the 10 families and 20 Lance Armstrong wanna-bes who use the bikes lanes will be super happy, but having traversed this route over decades, I can assure you that there will be total gridlock and more accidents.

I live on a busy street in MD that gets a lot of NIH commuter traffic, so I understand why residents want to find ways to incentivize options other than car travel. But realistically all the bike lane plan will accomplish is diverting traffic to neighborhood streets, creating huge traffic jams, and reducing interest in working in downtown offices. I know the NWDC crowd thinks that's awesome, but the people who run small businesses and their employees may be less enamored of a city leadership that is actively encouraging smaller numbers of daily visitors.

Maybe you should take this energy and use it to advocate for traffic calming and transit in MoCo. It’s pretty hellish there, and one reason that I am likely staying in DC instead of moving to MoCo. In fact, the Ct Ave project is specifically one reason I might stay.

PS: you can drive to a metro station and metro in to DC. And no, you’re not going to be driving on side streets deep with Cleveland Park. That’s not actually how traffic works.

It's from Calvert Street to Chevy Chase Circle, not just Cleveland Park. There are a lot of side streets along that route and yes that is exactly how traffic works. If there's congestion then an alternate route is found.

Please read the traffic study. Traffic is largely REDUCED on ew side streets and INCREASED on other
major NS routes. https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/02_Conn%20Ave_Public%20Meeting_LR%232-Traff-Parking_FINAL_04012021.pdf. On EW side street where it does increase, the increase is something like 15% which will likely not even be noticeable.

And if you care so much, take the metro.

I did and I noticed a few things. It claims there will be a 1000% increase in bike commuters and that 7,000 cars will disappear. It used pandemic traffic numbers as its base. It looked at what happens if more people than anticipated use bikes but not what happens if less people use them. It says traffic will be diverted to GW Parkway and Georgia but not 16th, Reno, and Beach (the most logical alternative routes) let alone how people would get to Reno and Beach (ie: side streets). It is obvious that the study was done with an end goal in mind and was massaged accordingly.

False. The traffic numbers are from 2019.

Try again.

I’m not sure there is a credible urban planner anywhere on the planet that would use pre COVID traffic statistics to make post-pandemic regional transportation infrastructure decisions. The world has fundamentally changed. How, when, and where people work and live has changed. Can’t we at least get updated transportation studies so we can make an informed decisions?

If anything, that makes the 2019 numbers more conservative since fewer people are going downtown and more people are working from home and will want to run errands in their neighborhoods during the day. So you are basically saying that the bike lanes are a good thing to help support businesses in a post-COVID world.

I agree.

Ummm, no. Transit ridership is 50% lower. So traffic may be through the roof. Maybe we should find out?

So you think post-COVID, there is more car traffic than pre-COVID?

There is NOTHING to support that assertion in any jurisdiction.

This you? We need fresh so we don’t totally screw this up for a generation and kill uptown and downtown businesses along the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/09/16/hybrid-work-schedules-pandemic-commuting/

Please show a study that shows that bike lanes kill businesses.

The businesses that get get out of their leases are already leaving. What other proof do you need?

Businesses leaving three years before this is implemented are not leaving because of the bike lanes.

Most commercial leases are for 5 years. Some even for ten. When our ANC commissioners and the bike mafia hears “lease” they think it’s like the 1 year lease on their rental apartments. There is a reason we have age limits to run for federal offices. Stating to think we need that at the ANC level.

The doctor closing his part time practice at Uptown Vision to focus on his Takoma practice isn't really a loss. He was only there 2 days a week at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's in everyone's interest -- drivers, pedestrians, cyclists -- to have any much car traffic moving as efficiently as possible on major roads, ie any street named after a state. That's what they were designed for and that's where everyone expects there to be lots of traffic. When we force drivers to start cutting through neighborhoods on side streets because the main arteries are clogged, that's when we're asking for trouble.

It is also in everyone's interest to have roads where pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, can move about their business in a safe manner. When a road is designed such that someone operating a car can move fast enough that they overturn it, as happened on Connecticut Avenue earlier this month, that is problematic. I am not sure why anyone would defend the status quo, which is clearly unsafe.

We'd all be better off if the handful of dudes super into bikes would just take the subway.

If I want to go from Chevy Chase to Vace, the Metro isn't really going to help me.

You're in luck! It turns out there is also a city bus system!

It is faster for me to bike. I would just like to do it safely.

Call me crazy but the city shouldnt have to spend billions of dollars and screw up traffic for hundreds of thousands of people because you and a handful of other Bernie bros don't like the bus

PP either has a terrible grasp of numbers or a terrible grasp of the truth but DC does not spend billions on bike and pedestrian infrastructure - in fact it is less than 5% of DDOT's massive budget which is astonishing because most people in DC get around every day in some manner without using a vehicle.

Obviously the city doesnt spend billions in one year, but over the years? Yes, of course it has spend billions. We've had bike lanes in this city for almost 15 years.

No really DC has not spent billions.

I would be shocked if DC has even spent 50 million on bike lanes over the last 10 years.

DC doesn't even have 20 miles of protected bike lanes in the entire city.

Connecticut Avenue is estimated to cost about 8 million for 3 miles but that estimate includes a couple of hawk signals and some pedestrian islands and lots of design work. I'm pretty sure the CP streetscape improvement project is costing more by itself.

Most of the bike lanes we have in DC are just paint and some signs which is to say they are very inexpensive projects - as in like $10-$15000 for an entire project.

Just as an FYI DDOTs FY 2023 capital budget is $650 million, most of which goes towards repaving roads. DDOT has over 200 full time traffic engineers but just 2 staffers who work on bike lanes full time so on the personnel side as well spending on roads just swamps what is spent on bikes.

Uh, well here's a sampling from this year's budget alone:

$36 million to expand bike lanes
$15 million to expand Capital Bikeshare
$1.3 million to hire a full-time team to clean bike lanes
$57 million to make K Street more bike/bus friendly
$21 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$18.5 million to build bike/pedestrian bridge
$120,000 to buy electric bikes

so basically a very small percentage for non-car transportation.