Connecticut Ave bike lanes are back!

[Anonymous]

Left this thread for awhile and now people are arguing school groups would bike to the zoo. I see the pro-bike lane arguments are not improving over time.

[Anonymous]

The ANC majority has something to say: They won and DC better do bike lanes on Connecticut. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Put the bike lane on 34th - Reno. If DDOT then could “encourage” more thru vehicle traffic to move off of Reno and back to Connecticut (the major arterial route) that could be be a win-win for several adjacent neighborhoods.

Cleveland Park and North Cleveland Park residents advocated for decades to get the turn lanes on 34th/Reno. They are not going away anytime soon and particularly not for bike lanes that have no commercial activity and do not connect from one place to another.

The neighborhoods advocated to remove the old reversible lane on Reno/34th, which was more dangerous than the one on Connecticut. Center turn lanes not so much, because they encourage cut through traffic to divert to side streets in search of faster short cuts. In fact, the sections of Reno without the highway-like turn lane (esp. north of Nebraska) seem safer and calmer than the area with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s the fixation with bike lanes on Connecticut? Wisconsin makes more sense for all the bike to neighborhood businesses and schools advocates. There are more students attending schools along the Wisconsin corridor and tons of businesses and a library to frequent. Let’s put dedicated bike lanes from Friendship Heights to Georgetown along Wisconsin. Makes much more sense.

Quite true, actually. And more of the businesses along Wisconsin have off street parking available (except in Georgetown).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the fixation with bike lanes on Connecticut? Wisconsin makes more sense for all the bike to neighborhood businesses and schools advocates. There are more students attending schools along the Wisconsin corridor and tons of businesses and a library to frequent. Let’s put dedicated bike lanes from Friendship Heights to Georgetown along Wisconsin. Makes much more sense.

Quite true, actually. And more of the businesses along Wisconsin have off street parking available (except in Georgetown).

Except that's where Frumin and half the advocates live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Put the bike lane on 34th - Reno. If DDOT then could “encourage” more thru vehicle traffic to move off of Reno and back to Connecticut (the major arterial route) that could be be a win-win for several adjacent neighborhoods.

Cleveland Park and North Cleveland Park residents advocated for decades to get the turn lanes on 34th/Reno. They are not going away anytime soon and particularly not for bike lanes that have no commercial activity and do not connect from one place to another.

The neighborhoods advocated to remove the old reversible lane on Reno/34th, which was more dangerous than the one on Connecticut. Center turn lanes not so much, because they encourage cut through traffic to divert to side streets in search of faster short cuts. In fact, the sections of Reno without the highway-like turn lane (esp. north of Nebraska) seem safer and calmer than the area with it.

There are like 4 intersections on all of 34th/Reno that don't have turn lanes. The reason it seems calmer above Fessenden is because it is wider. But that also means people drive faster on that section.

[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:Interesting.

DDOT said the configuration:

-will not impede emergency vehicles
-will not be an issue as an evacuation route
-will not impact "cut through" traffic


So basically everything the project opponents claimed was a lie. They just didn't want bike lanes, even if the proposed solution is worse, which it is.

I guess that is a win?

Did anyone ever think this was about anything other than parking?

Hell hath no fury quite like an Upper NW boomer threatened with the loss of his parking space.

Or, as Mary Cheh was fond of saying, all politics are local and all local politics is parking.

They kept their parking spaces so, yes, for them it’s a win.

Connecticut Ave will go on a road diet, just not with bike lanes. Curb extensions will reduce the distance that pedestrians, particularly elderly residents and kids, need to cross at certain intersections. So Connecticut will be safer, which was what Safer Connecticut Avenue wanted. DDOT seems to be leaning to another north-south bike lane route, like Reno Road.

The basic difference between what is proposed and "Option C" is an additional lane for parking.

The downside here is that without a facility for bikes, scooters etc, and with buses using the right side travel lane, it will be a mess because cars will be stuck behind both the cyclists and the buses, killing any throughput advantage that might have been gained with bike lanes.

The pedestrain safety components are roughly the same.

And Reno Road as an alternative is a non-starter. Too narrow and hilly, with no obvious destinations. You will still have cyclists using ConnAve because that is where the shops, library etc are located.

There aren't enough bicylists to matter. There is no throughput advantage to bike lanes.

There could be a million cyclists and it still wouldn't matter to you.

There could be a million bicyclists and they would still insist they didn't see any.

My opinion is irrelevent. The simple fact of the matter is that there aren't millions, thousands, or even hundreds of bicyclists on Connecticut Ave.

You keep saying this and it simply isn't true. The stat you cite was COMMUTING, like daily, downtown. There are still hundreds of cyclists using Connecticut Avenue to go to school and run errands. Those are not factored in the MWCOG survey.

Firstly let's put this straight out in the open. You clearly don't live near or use Connecticut Ave, north of Calvert.

Secondly, the number comes from DDOT which counted the number of bicyclists, just as they did cars. They have never released the exact number but they used a de minimis number of 100 as their estimate. That means we know it is less than 100.

Please remember that all numbers are done on a full year daily average basis.

They counted in the street. Not the sidewalk. Also, they updated that low stat observed in 2019 in like september 2022 and it was far higher by then.

Tell us the number then

Go find it yourself. Their website is trash for this project because its gone on too long and had too many people come and go on it.

[Anonymous]

So let me get this straight...

Save Conn Ave pushed for years to get the bike lanes taken out of this project. They seem to have succeeded on that. But to what end exactly?

This stupid road is going to be 4 travel lanes at all times now. This isn't an improvement over the other idea, this is bullshit. My commute is going to get longer now driving from just north of the border through Conn because someone wants to park their car on the street outside of their apartment during rush hour? This is absurd. Even more absurd than the asinine bike lanes idea.

Can we just cancel all of this crap and go back to what we had before the pandemic. Yes, the reversible was confusing, but it worked when it was there and traffic moved freely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the fixation with bike lanes on Connecticut? Wisconsin makes more sense for all the bike to neighborhood businesses and schools advocates. There are more students attending schools along the Wisconsin corridor and tons of businesses and a library to frequent. Let’s put dedicated bike lanes from Friendship Heights to Georgetown along Wisconsin. Makes much more sense.

Quite true, actually. And more of the businesses along Wisconsin have off street parking available (except in Georgetown).

Except that's where Frumin and half the advocates live.

Maybe that explains it. There are also more grocery stores for all of the people who want to bike to do their food shopping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if our ANCs had spent the past five years advocating instead on the crime crisis, school overcrowding, and housing voucher mismanagement. Issues that actually impact the majority of residents along the corridor. What a better place this could be.

Personally I am glad that the ANCs where I am (the Hill) have spent the effort on bike lanes and other vision zero projects. It is SO nice now. C St especially transformed from an ugly 6 ln highway into a really pretty avenue.

Wards 5 and Wards 6 have remarkably improving and solid bike infrastructure. I've been riding around that area increasingly lately and it's wonderful. And tons of peo0le, kids included, using it too.

yep

[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:Interesting.

DDOT said the configuration:

-will not impede emergency vehicles
-will not be an issue as an evacuation route
-will not impact "cut through" traffic


So basically everything the project opponents claimed was a lie. They just didn't want bike lanes, even if the proposed solution is worse, which it is.

I guess that is a win?

Did anyone ever think this was about anything other than parking?

Hell hath no fury quite like an Upper NW boomer threatened with the loss of his parking space.

Or, as Mary Cheh was fond of saying, all politics are local and all local politics is parking.

They kept their parking spaces so, yes, for them it’s a win.

Connecticut Ave will go on a road diet, just not with bike lanes. Curb extensions will reduce the distance that pedestrians, particularly elderly residents and kids, need to cross at certain intersections. So Connecticut will be safer, which was what Safer Connecticut Avenue wanted. DDOT seems to be leaning to another north-south bike lane route, like Reno Road.

The basic difference between what is proposed and "Option C" is an additional lane for parking.

The downside here is that without a facility for bikes, scooters etc, and with buses using the right side travel lane, it will be a mess because cars will be stuck behind both the cyclists and the buses, killing any throughput advantage that might have been gained with bike lanes.

The pedestrain safety components are roughly the same.

And Reno Road as an alternative is a non-starter. Too narrow and hilly, with no obvious destinations. You will still have cyclists using ConnAve because that is where the shops, library etc are located.

There aren't enough bicylists to matter. There is no throughput advantage to bike lanes.

There could be a million cyclists and it still wouldn't matter to you.

There could be a million bicyclists and they would still insist they didn't see any.

My opinion is irrelevent. The simple fact of the matter is that there aren't millions, thousands, or even hundreds of bicyclists on Connecticut Ave.

You keep saying this and it simply isn't true. The stat you cite was COMMUTING, like daily, downtown. There are still hundreds of cyclists using Connecticut Avenue to go to school and run errands. Those are not factored in the MWCOG survey.

Firstly let's put this straight out in the open. You clearly don't live near or use Connecticut Ave, north of Calvert.

Secondly, the number comes from DDOT which counted the number of bicyclists, just as they did cars. They have never released the exact number but they used a de minimis number of 100 as their estimate. That means we know it is less than 100.

Please remember that all numbers are done on a full year daily average basis.

They counted in the street. Not the sidewalk. Also, they updated that low stat observed in 2019 in like september 2022 and it was far higher by then.

Tell us the number then

Go find it yourself. Their website is trash for this project because its gone on too long and had too many people come and go on it.

It's that bad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Put the bike lane on 34th - Reno. If DDOT then could “encourage” more thru vehicle traffic to move off of Reno and back to Connecticut (the major arterial route) that could be be a win-win for several adjacent neighborhoods.

Cleveland Park and North Cleveland Park residents advocated for decades to get the turn lanes on 34th/Reno. They are not going away anytime soon and particularly not for bike lanes that have no commercial activity and do not connect from one place to another.

The neighborhoods advocated to remove the old reversible lane on Reno/34th, which was more dangerous than the one on Connecticut. Center turn lanes not so much, because they encourage cut through traffic to divert to side streets in search of faster short cuts. In fact, the sections of Reno without the highway-like turn lane (esp. north of Nebraska) seem safer and calmer than the area with it.

There are like 4 intersections on all of 34th/Reno that don't have turn lanes. The reason it seems calmer above Fessenden is because it is wider. But that also means people drive faster on that section.

Didn’t DC install turn lanes on Western Ave and then removed them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight...

Save Conn Ave pushed for years to get the bike lanes taken out of this project. They seem to have succeeded on that. But to what end exactly?

This stupid road is going to be 4 travel lanes at all times now. This isn't an improvement over the other idea, this is bullshit. My commute is going to get longer now driving from just north of the border through Conn because someone wants to park their car on the street outside of their apartment during rush hour? This is absurd. Even more absurd than the asinine bike lanes idea.

Can we just cancel all of this crap and go back to what we had before the pandemic. Yes, the reversible was confusing, but it worked when it was there and traffic moved freely.

It gets better.

By having parking lanes, people driving will be stuck waiting for cars to pull in and out of the curb spots. Cyclists and buses will be using that same lane that cars are using to stage parking from. Drivers will be slowing down searching for spots, inhibiting that lane. So for all intent and purposes, instead of two clear through lanes as Concept C proposed, this will be a parking lane, a second lane with buses, bike and parking cars, and then a through lane, with turn lanes at the big intersections.

The "cut through" traffic that the project opponents envisioned will not be mitigated by this plan.
The evacuation route excuse was just plain dumb, but certainly isn't aided by bulb-outs and cars using the curb lane.
Emergency vehicles, as DDOT noted, will have no issue with any configuration DDOT conjures up including both Concept C and this one.

But hey, they really stuck it to the bike bros, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight...

Save Conn Ave pushed for years to get the bike lanes taken out of this project. They seem to have succeeded on that. But to what end exactly?

This stupid road is going to be 4 travel lanes at all times now. This isn't an improvement over the other idea, this is bullshit. My commute is going to get longer now driving from just north of the border through Conn because someone wants to park their car on the street outside of their apartment during rush hour? This is absurd. Even more absurd than the asinine bike lanes idea.

Can we just cancel all of this crap and go back to what we had before the pandemic. Yes, the reversible was confusing, but it worked when it was there and traffic moved freely.

I don't see why you can't just take the Metro or a bus.

Wasn't that the suggestion for people who want to bike but don't like what it's like now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight...

Save Conn Ave pushed for years to get the bike lanes taken out of this project. They seem to have succeeded on that. But to what end exactly?

This stupid road is going to be 4 travel lanes at all times now. This isn't an improvement over the other idea, this is bullshit. My commute is going to get longer now driving from just north of the border through Conn because someone wants to park their car on the street outside of their apartment during rush hour? This is absurd. Even more absurd than the asinine bike lanes idea.

Can we just cancel all of this crap and go back to what we had before the pandemic. Yes, the reversible was confusing, but it worked when it was there and traffic moved freely.

I don't see why you can't just take the Metro or a bus.

Wasn't that the suggestion for people who want to bike but don't like what it's like now?

how many L buses are there per hour? What if you aren't close to a metro station and your destination isn't close to a metro station?