Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

That’s all DC knows how to do: tax, tax, tax.

Also, the only think a commuter tax would do is drive even more jobs into Virginia and Maryland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!! [/quote

People, bike lanes is a nice to have. A tax base is a have to have. Make it more costly or difficult for commuters and more will stay home. Then DC has to raise taxes and even more people will leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

the city has signed tax agreements with virginia and maryland banning commuter taxes. so there's that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

the city has signed tax agreements with virginia and maryland banning commuter taxes. so there's that.

LOL - where do people come up with this stuff?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s just ban all cars and all bikes. Everyone walks.

I'm sure you are kidding but if you re-purposed all the roads and parking lots for housing and parks you'd have the density to have most things within walking distance and yes in fact people could walk to most of the things they need to do on a day to day basis.

Works in lots and lots of cities and they don't even have to be that vertical to achieve the density and most of those same cities are blessed with outstanding parks and recreation spaces too.

Interestingly the CT Ave corridor already has two of the most difficult things needed to make such a place really work - high capacity public transportation and access to fantastic green spaces.

But I prefer to drive my hybrid, but thanks anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

What is missing here is that RC has plenty of paths and walkways that could be widened for bikes. For commuters to downtown, and for athletic bikers, Rock Creek is far safer than CT Avenue will ever be, under any conditions.

[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:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

the city has signed tax agreements with virginia and maryland banning commuter taxes. so there's that.

LOL - where do people come up with this stuff?

DC gets a large Federal grant to offset this. Moreover, if DC had a commuter tax, some businesses would simply move to the burbs. If I am working from home 2-3 days a week, and if I want to avoid the DC bureaucracy, I move my business. Very simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

That’s all DC knows how to do: tax, tax, tax.

Also, the only think a commuter tax would do is drive even more jobs into Virginia and Maryland.

Lets get real. The reason that Roslyn, Bethesda, and Silver Spring exist is because some businesses want to avoid DC.

[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:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

That’s all DC knows how to do: tax, tax, tax.

Also, the only think a commuter tax would do is drive even more jobs into Virginia and Maryland.

Lets get real. The reason that Roslyn, Bethesda, and Silver Spring exist is because some businesses want to avoid DC.

It’s a win-win. Take advantage of a highly educated workforce. Don’t have to deal with DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

the city has signed tax agreements with virginia and maryland banning commuter taxes. so there's that.

Uh, no, the Federal Government prohibits such a tax. Where on god's green earth did you come up with this?

[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:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

It would be less painful to go and hit my head against a wall.

Doesn't matter what it is in MD - this is a discussion about the road in DC.

And you should read up about the history - the Avenue, including in MD, originally evolved around streetcars and the suburban portions pre-dated the beltway by more than 60 years so no it really doesn't matter that it is a feeder to the beltway something that if you knew your history wasn't even true until 20 years ago.

And even if it was designed as a state highway (which is debatable), who cares? Residents who want to live and work in DC are never allowed to change roads because they were once designed for one specific purpose?

I know it's hard for some DC residents to comprehend, but it's more than what you want for your little slice of the pie. You're part of a much larger region.

Feel free to pay a commuter tax!!

the city has signed tax agreements with virginia and maryland banning commuter taxes. so there's that.

LOL - where do people come up with this stuff?

DC gets a large Federal grant to offset this. Moreover, if DC had a commuter tax, some businesses would simply move to the burbs. If I am working from home 2-3 days a week, and if I want to avoid the DC bureaucracy, I move my business. Very simple.

OMG, DC hasn't received the "Federal Payment" in over 20 years. Good lord, know your local civics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

What is missing here is that RC has plenty of paths and walkways that could be widened for bikes. For commuters to downtown, and for athletic bikers, Rock Creek is far safer than CT Avenue will ever be, under any conditions.

This isn't about "commuting downtown" - this is about teh safe passage of your neighbors from one part of Connecticut Avenue to another. People bike to shop, to go to work, to go to school etc. The best and easiest way to do this is in a straight line. Sending cyclists who are going from Cleveland Park to Van Ness via Rock Creek is idiotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

What is missing here is that RC has plenty of paths and walkways that could be widened for bikes. For commuters to downtown, and for athletic bikers, Rock Creek is far safer than CT Avenue will ever be, under any conditions.

This isn't about "commuting downtown" - this is about teh safe passage of your neighbors from one part of Connecticut Avenue to another. People bike to shop, to go to work, to go to school etc. The best and easiest way to do this is in a straight line. Sending cyclists who are going from Cleveland Park to Van Ness via Rock Creek is idiotic.

This is a great thought. Maybe we should build an underground train along Connecticut Ave that protects pedestrians and bikers from weather and cars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

What is missing here is that RC has plenty of paths and walkways that could be widened for bikes. For commuters to downtown, and for athletic bikers, Rock Creek is far safer than CT Avenue will ever be, under any conditions.

This isn't about "commuting downtown" - this is about teh safe passage of your neighbors from one part of Connecticut Avenue to another. People bike to shop, to go to work, to go to school etc. The best and easiest way to do this is in a straight line. Sending cyclists who are going from Cleveland Park to Van Ness via Rock Creek is idiotic.

This is a great thought. Maybe we should build an underground train along Connecticut Ave that protects pedestrians and bikers from weather and cars?

Most people can ride faster than it takes to take the escalator, wait and take the escalator again. Plus....it's free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:biking is not for everyone - i had a coworker in her 60s fracture her elbow in a solo accident from just falling off the bike - many people have health/physical reasons why they need to take the bus, walk or drive v.s. biking. The idea that everyone has to become a biker is part of why people are reacting to these posts like this.

What is the specific mph the bike lane is supposed to calm traffic to? Personally keeping everyone driving under the spped limit to 23-25 sounds good to me. Is that the goal or is the goal to have everyone in gridlock inching along. Some clarity on that point might be helpful and seem less focused only on the convenience of the existing small number of bikers

Nobody is saying the everyone has to bike. There are six lanes dedicated to cars and two are being repurposed for bike lanes. So there are still four lanes for cars.

Not everyone can drive, not everyone can bike. This plan accommodates both and also makes it safer for pedestrians.

The problem here is a disagreement about the objective of public policy. Most people think that it should maximize utility. You think it should be used to deliver goodies to special, niche constituencies.

I don’t think cyclists and pedestrians are a niche constituency so there is more than one disagreement there.

What is not a niche constituency in DC is people who don't drive for all their trips. 40% of DC households don't own a car and the majority of households that do own cars are, like our family, car light.

So we do drive. But we also walk, take the bus, take Metro and bike. We occasionally (though as rarely as possible) use Uber. I have a Capital Bikeshare membership though I only use it a couple of times a month. Much to my chagrin my teen regularly rents those Lime scooters for getting around and leaves them on the sidewalk in front of our house. And sometimes if both kids have sports events in the burbs at the same time we carpool.

The overwhelming majority of cars on the street in my DC neighborhood are from MD - easily 90% - I see no reason why DC transportation policy should be oriented towards that constituency particularly when they degrade the quality of life for DC residents.

DC transportation policy should instead be designed around safely moving DC residents around the city via all modes of transportation and remaking CT Ave improves the corridor for bikers, pedestrians, transit users and yes drivers. It comes at the expense of some parking spaces and some rush hour road carrying capacity but so what - it will make the road safe and usable for more DC residents while making it feel more like a neighborhood street than a traffic sewer for MD residents who have no concerns whatsoever for the livability of our city.

But Connecticut Avenue is not a local road. It’s literally designated as a state Highway once it enters Maryland and it’s a direct feeder into the federal highway system. Trying to make Connecticut Avenue a “neighborhood street” is not wise or even possible.

What is missing here is that RC has plenty of paths and walkways that could be widened for bikes. For commuters to downtown, and for athletic bikers, Rock Creek is far safer than CT Avenue will ever be, under any conditions.

You do know that RCP is federal land, don’t you?