Norfolk Avenue Development Survey (bikes lanes, etc)

[Anonymous]

Downtown Bethesda is pathetically un-friendly to pedestrians. It needs a major overhaul to live up to its potential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no plans for bike lanes on Norfolk Avenue. The original plan was for a "shared street", where people walk, bike, and drive slowly on the same street. The question now is whether the Norfolk Avenue streetery should remain as is, or whether people should be allowed to drive on/through the streetery.
https://bethesdamagazine.com/2022/12/12/montgomery-planning-department-reconsiders-norfolk-avenue-shared-street-project/

This is false.
https://www.montgomeryplanning.org/community/plan_areas/bethesda_chevy_chase/master_plans/woodmont_march2006/Woodmont%20Approved%20and%20Adopted%20PDF.pdf

That plan is from 2006. It has been superseded by multiple other plans, including the Bethesda downtown plan (2017) and the bicycle master plan (2018).

The “bicycle master plan” is not a real planning document. For example, it calls for adding residential density near regional parks.

Why is it a bad idea to add residential density near parks? Seems like a good place to add residences?

Take a look at a map of regional parks. It contradicts plannings own “compact growth”.

It was an opportunity for Casey Anderson to allow his WABA friends fake power.

You aren't making a lot of sense and don't seem to actually understand planning or smart growth so it is hard to respond to whatever you are referencing - do you have a planning document you can link to that would better explain?

People love parks and being near them is good for the people who live in housing so located.

Which is not to say adding density near every park is a good idea - in many cases it is in fact probably a bad idea if the density isn't paired with transit and retail and existing infra. But there are certainly locations on Montgomery County where it would make sense.

Some of the most valuable real estate in the world is dense housing paired with a fantastic park and one of the worlds best public transit systems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Downtown Bethesda is pathetically un-friendly to pedestrians. It needs a major overhaul to live up to its potential.

That's a little unfair - it has a lot of room for improvement and to its credit MCDOT is working on improving Bethesda but it is hardly pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the heads up - feel like I follow all things Bethesda on social media and missed this survey.

Just took it and indicated my strong support for removing cars on Norfolk and making it a pedestrian and bike oriented avenue and a safe space for everyone.

Via my taxes there is a lot of publicly subsidized public parking in Bethesda - an advantage of all of that parking should be options to make better use of our streets - no one reason Norfolk can't be a fabulous and safe car free or car lite zone.

Sure, it wouldn’t be fair if they only collected reality-based opinions. I’m going to add the need for a local roller coaster transit system and edible traffic cones. Let’s shoot for the moon fellow Yimbys!!!

A drum circle at every intersection!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the heads up - feel like I follow all things Bethesda on social media and missed this survey.

Just took it and indicated my strong support for removing cars on Norfolk and making it a pedestrian and bike oriented avenue and a safe space for everyone.

Via my taxes there is a lot of publicly subsidized public parking in Bethesda - an advantage of all of that parking should be options to make better use of our streets - no one reason Norfolk can't be a fabulous and safe car free or car lite zone.

Sure, it wouldn’t be fair if they only collected reality-based opinions. I’m going to add the need for a local roller coaster transit system and edible traffic cones. Let’s shoot for the moon fellow Yimbys!!!

A drum circle at every intersection!

Weird take - betting you live in some car dependent hellish corner of Rockville and don't want any space taken away from cars.

Lots of streets are pedestrianized and it generally turns out to be very popular and good for business - in fact Norfolk has essentially been such a street for 2+ years now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no plans for bike lanes on Norfolk Avenue. The original plan was for a "shared street", where people walk, bike, and drive slowly on the same street. The question now is whether the Norfolk Avenue streetery should remain as is, or whether people should be allowed to drive on/through the streetery.
https://bethesdamagazine.com/2022/12/12/montgomery-planning-department-reconsiders-norfolk-avenue-shared-street-project/

This is false.
https://www.montgomeryplanning.org/community/plan_areas/bethesda_chevy_chase/master_plans/woodmont_march2006/Woodmont%20Approved%20and%20Adopted%20PDF.pdf

That plan is from 2006. It has been superseded by multiple other plans, including the Bethesda downtown plan (2017) and the bicycle master plan (2018).

The “bicycle master plan” is not a real planning document. For example, it calls for adding residential density near regional parks.

Why is it a bad idea to add residential density near parks? Seems like a good place to add residences?

Take a look at a map of regional parks. It contradicts plannings own “compact growth”.

It was an opportunity for Casey Anderson to allow his WABA friends fake power.

You aren't making a lot of sense and don't seem to actually understand planning or smart growth so it is hard to respond to whatever you are referencing - do you have a planning document you can link to that would better explain?

People love parks and being near them is good for the people who live in housing so located.

Which is not to say adding density near every park is a good idea - in many cases it is in fact probably a bad idea if the density isn't paired with transit and retail and existing infra. But there are certainly locations on Montgomery County where it would make sense.

Some of the most valuable real estate in the world is dense housing paired with a fantastic park and one of the worlds best public transit systems.

You clearly don’t live in Montgomery County. Almost all regional parks except Cabin John and Wheaton are in areas that have limited access to transit where if more housing was built you’d complain of car dependency and sprawl.

And you tell me that I don’t understand how planning works, can you identify which regional park is growth corridor? Seems that when they were preparing Thrive they could care less about the bicycle master plan.

So not a real document that anyone should take seriously.

[Anonymous]

What happens to all the business on that street? Most are mom and pop. Will they be pushed out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What happens to all the business on that street? Most are mom and pop. Will they be pushed out?

You mean, the ones that have been doing fine for 2 years with the Norfolk Avenue streetery?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happens to all the business on that street? Most are mom and pop. Will they be pushed out?

You mean, the ones that have been doing fine for 2 years with the Norfolk Avenue streetery?

Most of the businesses on that street are restaurants so having more outdoor space where people can eat or hang out seems to help them.

[Anonymous]

No so. The jewelry stores, the watch repair, the shoe store, the arts district, the kids activities. What happens to them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are no plans for bike lanes on Norfolk Avenue. The original plan was for a "shared street", where people walk, bike, and drive slowly on the same street. The question now is whether the Norfolk Avenue streetery should remain as is, or whether people should be allowed to drive on/through the streetery.
https://bethesdamagazine.com/2022/12/12/montgomery-planning-department-reconsiders-norfolk-avenue-shared-street-project/

This is false.
https://www.montgomeryplanning.org/community/plan_areas/bethesda_chevy_chase/master_plans/woodmont_march2006/Woodmont%20Approved%20and%20Adopted%20PDF.pdf

That plan is from 2006. It has been superseded by multiple other plans, including the Bethesda downtown plan (2017) and the bicycle master plan (2018).

The “bicycle master plan” is not a real planning document. For example, it calls for adding residential density near regional parks.

The Bicycle Master Plan is as real a planning document as the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways. The County Council adopted it, M-NCPPC approved it. There will also be, at some point, a Pedestrian Master Plan, which when adopted/approved will also be a real planning document.

And just like other master plans, they ignore when a developer wants to build something that’s not safe for cyclists or pedestrians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No so. The jewelry stores, the watch repair, the shoe store, the arts district, the kids activities. What happens to them?

...they continue what they have been doing for the past 2 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No so. The jewelry stores, the watch repair, the shoe store, the arts district, the kids activities. What happens to them?

...they continue what they have been doing for the past 2 years?

They continue to struggle. Including the shoe store.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No so. The jewelry stores, the watch repair, the shoe store, the arts district, the kids activities. What happens to them?

...they continue what they have been doing for the past 2 years?

They continue to struggle. Including the shoe store.

The shoe store is struggling because it's no longer possible for one car at a time to drive and park at the metered space in front of the store?

[Anonymous]

These stores will not survive the redevelopment.