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: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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

The 30,000 can slow down then. If the 30,000 weren’t such terrible, unsafe drivers, then this project wouldn’t be needed. Get your kid in your car ten minutes earlier, drive the speed limit and you can get them to school on time without endangering other kids walking and biking to school.

[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.

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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

again, the street is being narrowed to make it safer for everyone including pedestrians. stop lying.

the street is being narrowed for the sake of 300 fat white guys in spandex who love bikes. meanwhile tens of thousands of drivers will be shunted onto side streets that were never intended to accommodate so much traffic. which obviously make them substantially less safe. great work, dc. once again you show why we are among the worst run cities in the country.

[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.

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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

again, the street is being narrowed to make it safer for everyone including pedestrians. stop lying.

the street is being narrowed for the sake of 300 fat white guys in spandex who love bikes. meanwhile tens of thousands of drivers will be shunted onto side streets that were never intended to accommodate so much traffic. which obviously make them substantially less safe. great work, dc. once again you show why we are among the worst run cities in the country.

If drivers could obey the traffic laws, why would this be less safe? Don’t you stop at stop signs and zebra crossings? Don’t you observe the posted speed limits? Don’t you yield to pedestrians? Are you saying drivers just cannot help but be unsafe on residential streets?

[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.

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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

again, the street is being narrowed to make it safer for everyone including pedestrians. stop lying.

the street is being narrowed for the sake of 300 fat white guys in spandex who love bikes. meanwhile tens of thousands of drivers will be shunted onto side streets that were never intended to accommodate so much traffic. which obviously make them substantially less safe. great work, dc. once again you show why we are among the worst run cities in the country.

Still wondering who the fat guy in spandex joke is for. We get it your family is tired of your bad jokes so you try it here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

It's a +295 ft altitude gain (and -95 altitude) decrease over the entire 4.5 miles from Calvert to ChCh Circle. 295ft / 4.5 miles = 65.55 ft per mile. 4.5 miles x 5280 / 65.55ft = there is a one foot gain on average every 362.5ft. 362.5 / (4.5*5280) = 0.015. I.E., this is equal to a 1.5% grade.

0% is a flat road. 1-3% is "slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind."

I.E., a bike lane on Conn Ave is fine for even amateur riders on a 3-speed bikeshare bike.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!4m1!3e1

[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.

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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

again, the street is being narrowed to make it safer for everyone including pedestrians. stop lying.

the street is being narrowed for the sake of 300 fat white guys in spandex who love bikes. meanwhile tens of thousands of drivers will be shunted onto side streets that were never intended to accommodate so much traffic. which obviously make them substantially less safe. great work, dc. once again you show why we are among the worst run cities in the country.

Hey, I bike to my office and back home down Conn Ave every day and I'm a bony white guy who doesn't wear spandex, thank you very much!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

It's a +295 ft altitude gain (and -95 altitude) decrease over the entire 4.5 miles from Calvert to ChCh Circle. 295ft / 4.5 miles = 65.55 ft per mile. 4.5 miles x 5280 / 65.55ft = there is a one foot gain on average every 362.5ft. 362.5 / (4.5*5280) = 0.015. I.E., this is equal to a 1.5% grade.

0% is a flat road. 1-3% is "slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind."

I.E., a bike lane on Conn Ave is fine for even amateur riders on a 3-speed bikeshare bike.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!4m1!3e1

Bah, didn't realize google maps changed the map on me when I reset it to bike from car. Figures. LOL. Well, redoing it here with the straight shot down conn ave, which google doesn't recommend for fairly obvious reasons right now:

197ft gain / 0 feet decrease, over 3.3 miles (circle to calvert).

197 / 3.3 = 59.6969 ft per mile. 3.3x5280 / 59.6969 = or a one foot gain every 291.87. 291.87 / (3.3x5280) = 0.0167, so we'll round that up to a 1.7% grade, which is still trivial for even an amateur on a 3 speed bikeshare.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m10!3m4!1m2!1d-77.064143!2d38.9452578!3s0x89b7c9cecc052211:0xc86e8fb885f9567d!3m4!1m2!1d-77.0744092!2d38.9629019!3s0x89b7c9a35095f7dd:0xe5b6c3084846e742!1m0!3e1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

It's a +295 ft altitude gain (and -95 altitude) decrease over the entire 4.5 miles from Calvert to ChCh Circle. 295ft / 4.5 miles = 65.55 ft per mile. 4.5 miles x 5280 / 65.55ft = there is a one foot gain on average every 362.5ft. 362.5 / (4.5*5280) = 0.015. I.E., this is equal to a 1.5% grade.

0% is a flat road. 1-3% is "slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind."

I.E., a bike lane on Conn Ave is fine for even amateur riders on a 3-speed bikeshare bike.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!4m1!3e1

Bah, didn't realize google maps changed the map on me when I reset it to bike from car. Figures. LOL. Well, redoing it here with the straight shot down conn ave, which google doesn't recommend for fairly obvious reasons right now:

197ft gain / 0 feet decrease, over 3.3 miles (circle to calvert).

197 / 3.3 = 59.6969 ft per mile. 3.3x5280 / 59.6969 = or a one foot gain every 291.87. 291.87 / (3.3x5280) = 0.0167, so we'll round that up to a 1.7% grade, which is still trivial for even an amateur on a 3 speed bikeshare.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m10!3m4!1m2!1d-77.064143!2d38.9452578!3s0x89b7c9cecc052211:0xc86e8fb885f9567d!3m4!1m2!1d-77.0744092!2d38.9629019!3s0x89b7c9a35095f7dd:0xe5b6c3084846e742!1m0!3e1

LMFAO. Where do you live, because it’s not DC. The elevation gain is not gradual. All of the elevation gain is basically in two separate stretches. One from Cathedral to the bridge. The other from Rodman to Nebraska.

It’s honestly really odd for an out of towner even to be doing this. Incredible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

No one bikes over the Taft Bridge, you go 18th or Columbia to the Ellington Bridge -thus not going up the hill by the Hinkley Hilton. And even still, that isn't that big of a hill.

[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.

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.

Again, what is there is adequate. There is no need to disrupt the 30,000 who like to shop, work and go to school in their car for the 200 (optimistically) who ride to work on their bike for a portion of the year when weather conditions are favorable.

again, the street is being narrowed to make it safer for everyone including pedestrians. stop lying.

the street is being narrowed for the sake of 300 fat white guys in spandex who love bikes. meanwhile tens of thousands of drivers will be shunted onto side streets that were never intended to accommodate so much traffic. which obviously make them substantially less safe. great work, dc. once again you show why we are among the worst run cities in the country.

The street is already backed up. those cars are already using the side streets. The conditions you are fearing on are already here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

This project starts at Calvert and goes north to Legation. DuPont to Woodley? How is that relevant?

The supporters of the project want to take away one sidewalk after Calvert over the bridge over the park to DuPont and make it bike only.

[Anonymous]

I’d like to start a petition to name the CT Ave PBL after NDD for all that he has done for the cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

It's a +295 ft altitude gain (and -95 altitude) decrease over the entire 4.5 miles from Calvert to ChCh Circle. 295ft / 4.5 miles = 65.55 ft per mile. 4.5 miles x 5280 / 65.55ft = there is a one foot gain on average every 362.5ft. 362.5 / (4.5*5280) = 0.015. I.E., this is equal to a 1.5% grade.

0% is a flat road. 1-3% is "slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind."

I.E., a bike lane on Conn Ave is fine for even amateur riders on a 3-speed bikeshare bike.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!4m1!3e1

Bah, didn't realize google maps changed the map on me when I reset it to bike from car. Figures. LOL. Well, redoing it here with the straight shot down conn ave, which google doesn't recommend for fairly obvious reasons right now:

197ft gain / 0 feet decrease, over 3.3 miles (circle to calvert).

197 / 3.3 = 59.6969 ft per mile. 3.3x5280 / 59.6969 = or a one foot gain every 291.87. 291.87 / (3.3x5280) = 0.0167, so we'll round that up to a 1.7% grade, which is still trivial for even an amateur on a 3 speed bikeshare.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/38.9235254,-77.051479/38.9674831,-77.0770136/@38.9455618,-77.0834518,14z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m10!3m4!1m2!1d-77.064143!2d38.9452578!3s0x89b7c9cecc052211:0xc86e8fb885f9567d!3m4!1m2!1d-77.0744092!2d38.9629019!3s0x89b7c9a35095f7dd:0xe5b6c3084846e742!1m0!3e1

LMFAO. Where do you live, because it’s not DC. The elevation gain is not gradual. All of the elevation gain is basically in two separate stretches. One from Cathedral to the bridge. The other from Rodman to Nebraska.

It’s honestly really odd for an out of towner even to be doing this. Incredible.

I'm not an out of towner, I ride it like every day. It's a relatively even rise the whole way up with just a couple places that are steeper (the most notable being albermarle to Ellicott, which even that is still a reasonable 5.5% grade and it's only 0.4 miles). The rest of it is all basically a slow, gradual hill.

The rodman to Nebraska segment is only +82 ft over 1.3mi. that's still a 1.6% grade.

[Anonymous]

I guess the people who never bike, also don't know history. Connecticut Avenue was literally built by the Chevy Chase Land Company, who developed the Avenue as a streetcar suburb. As such, the grading that took place to make the streetcar feasible also makes Connecticut Avenue a pretty easy stretch to manage on a bike.

Only someone who never rides would think that any stretch of the Avenue was a challenge. I guess having to push down more on an accelerator can strain one's calf a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Enough with besmirching people in the neighborhood. What’s Trumpian is denigrating those who aren’t unstinting supporters of Plan C with ad hominem attacks. You’re trying to divide people by making snide comments about what type of dwelling they live in and/or how much money they might have. Stop it. I was mostly in the Plan C camp but I’m so disgusted with the snark and snideness that’s coming from the main proponents,including ANC reps, I’m starting to question the wisdom of going forward if this is who is driving it.

What is actually Trumpian are people who are opposed to the changes on Connecticut Avenue distorting facts or making up new ones to bolster their arguments.

Back with the projection again

Don’t know if it’s Trumpian but saying biking north on CT Ave is too hard because of the 5000 foot climb is a distortion.

You definitely don't know that hill. It's barely driveable with ice on it.

The street was literally build for a streetcar, which means it has always been relatively flat. Yes, thee is an incline over the span from Woodley Park to Chevy Chase, but there are no "steep hills" anywhere along the Avenue.

Dupont to Woodley Park is a big hill. That's what you say you are trying to connect. That's the hill people are talking about. Jiminy H Cricket. Are any of you all from DC?

This project starts at Calvert and goes north to Legation. DuPont to Woodley? How is that relevant?

The supporters of the project want to take away one sidewalk after Calvert over the bridge over the park to DuPont and make it bike only.

Because the claim has been that it is necessary to connect to it and that there will be a 1067% increase in bicycling commuting if we do so.