Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the idea of piloting the road reconfiguration, provided it could be done quickly and recognizing it would really only tell us about the impact on cars and not bikes.

It's unclear that the Save Connecticut Ave people have the capacity to understand this.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear that they do and that they (and Nick Ide) are just proposing it as a delay tactic. It's no different than all the B's the poor couple who wanted to split a 30,000 SQ ft plot into two in forest hills had to deal with. In fact, if you look at the people who are complaining about both Conn Ave and that split, you'll find a lot of folks in common.

I was thinking about something else in common: in Cleveland Park there is a huge overlap between the loudest proponents of constraining Connecticut Avenue, the Smart Growth lobby, and those who relentlessly pushed the ANC gerrymandering plan to split the neighborhood.

You mean "those who followed Council's redistricting directions to the letter and worked to undo prior gerrymandering." You can call it a gerrymander if you want, but doing so is sour grapes. It was completely legal redistricting that did not split census blocks, as required by law. The alternative maps your side presented didn't even take into account what would happen to the rest of Ward 3 if your preferred Cleveland Park gerrymander had been adopted. It wasn't until the third or fourth iteration, after oddly getting specific help from the Office of Planning, that you all could even get a map together that got the population numbers right.

My side’s maps? Most folks in CP are aware of how the same small group got themselves appointed to write the rules and rig the game, all in the name of electing an ANC that would happily comply with their agenda.

Your side's maps - I say "your side" because you are labeling the perfectly legal and appropriate redistricting as "gerrymandering." Your side developed maps with help from OP that neglected all of Ward 3 outside of Cleveland Park. Then, when called on it, your side had to go full grievance merchants to find a handful of people in other ANCs that would support your side's maps that were purposefully drawn to maximize SFH voting power.

The most shocking thing is that Mary Cheh handed the redistricting pen, in Ward 3 of all places, over to a seasoned GOP operative who worked for Donald Trump and Paul Manfort and is the longtime business partner of the creator of the infamous Willie Horton ad. Now he advocates for a special interest agenda with a vested interest in the outcome of ANC redistricting. Legal, maybe. But certainly not appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the idea of piloting the road reconfiguration, provided it could be done quickly and recognizing it would really only tell us about the impact on cars and not bikes.

It's unclear that the Save Connecticut Ave people have the capacity to understand this.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear that they do and that they (and Nick Ide) are just proposing it as a delay tactic. It's no different than all the B's the poor couple who wanted to split a 30,000 SQ ft plot into two in forest hills had to deal with. In fact, if you look at the people who are complaining about both Conn Ave and that split, you'll find a lot of folks in common.

I was thinking about something else in common: in Cleveland Park there is a huge overlap between the loudest proponents of constraining Connecticut Avenue, the Smart Growth lobby, and those who relentlessly pushed the ANC gerrymandering plan to split the neighborhood.

You mean "those who followed Council's redistricting directions to the letter and worked to undo prior gerrymandering." You can call it a gerrymander if you want, but doing so is sour grapes. It was completely legal redistricting that did not split census blocks, as required by law. The alternative maps your side presented didn't even take into account what would happen to the rest of Ward 3 if your preferred Cleveland Park gerrymander had been adopted. It wasn't until the third or fourth iteration, after oddly getting specific help from the Office of Planning, that you all could even get a map together that got the population numbers right.

My side’s maps? Most folks in CP are aware of how the same small group got themselves appointed to write the rules and rig the game, all in the name of electing an ANC that would happily comply with their agenda.

Your side's maps - I say "your side" because you are labeling the perfectly legal and appropriate redistricting as "gerrymandering." Your side developed maps with help from OP that neglected all of Ward 3 outside of Cleveland Park. Then, when called on it, your side had to go full grievance merchants to find a handful of people in other ANCs that would support your side's maps that were purposefully drawn to maximize SFH voting power.

The most shocking thing is that Mary Cheh handed the redistricting pen, in Ward 3 of all places, over to a seasoned GOP operative who worked for Donald Trump and Paul Manfort and is the longtime business partner of the creator of the infamous Willie Horton ad. Now he advocates for a special interest agenda with a vested interest in the outcome of ANC redistricting. Legal, maybe. But certainly not appropriate.

He drew all the maps?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

Try reading the law and stop playing games. A classified ad in the CityPaper would be insufficient on its own for notice.

Source: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/1-309.11#(c)

OMG you are one of a kind. Having a hard time seeing the forest? The funniest part is that it's true. A classified ad in Street Sense plus 4 telephone pole notes counts as notice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the idea of piloting the road reconfiguration, provided it could be done quickly and recognizing it would really only tell us about the impact on cars and not bikes.

It's unclear that the Save Connecticut Ave people have the capacity to understand this.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear that they do and that they (and Nick Ide) are just proposing it as a delay tactic. It's no different than all the B's the poor couple who wanted to split a 30,000 SQ ft plot into two in forest hills had to deal with. In fact, if you look at the people who are complaining about both Conn Ave and that split, you'll find a lot of folks in common.

I was thinking about something else in common: in Cleveland Park there is a huge overlap between the loudest proponents of constraining Connecticut Avenue, the Smart Growth lobby, and those who relentlessly pushed the ANC gerrymandering plan to split the neighborhood.

You mean the majority of people who live in Cleveland Park prefer a focus on the corridors, with ANC focus on a single corridor rather than multiple, and people want more density and affordable housing to support the failing businesses.

Because the Single Family voters have benefited from gerrymandering for the last 20-30 years.

Get over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the idea of piloting the road reconfiguration, provided it could be done quickly and recognizing it would really only tell us about the impact on cars and not bikes.

It's unclear that the Save Connecticut Ave people have the capacity to understand this.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear that they do and that they (and Nick Ide) are just proposing it as a delay tactic. It's no different than all the B's the poor couple who wanted to split a 30,000 SQ ft plot into two in forest hills had to deal with. In fact, if you look at the people who are complaining about both Conn Ave and that split, you'll find a lot of folks in common.

I was thinking about something else in common: in Cleveland Park there is a huge overlap between the loudest proponents of constraining Connecticut Avenue, the Smart Growth lobby, and those who relentlessly pushed the ANC gerrymandering plan to split the neighborhood.

You mean "those who followed Council's redistricting directions to the letter and worked to undo prior gerrymandering." You can call it a gerrymander if you want, but doing so is sour grapes. It was completely legal redistricting that did not split census blocks, as required by law. The alternative maps your side presented didn't even take into account what would happen to the rest of Ward 3 if your preferred Cleveland Park gerrymander had been adopted. It wasn't until the third or fourth iteration, after oddly getting specific help from the Office of Planning, that you all could even get a map together that got the population numbers right.

My side’s maps? Most folks in CP are aware of how the same small group got themselves appointed to write the rules and rig the game, all in the name of electing an ANC that would happily comply with their agenda.

???

Mary Cheh appointed people from across the Ward. After the fustercluck of the 2011 redistricting which saw ANC commissioners serving on the Ward 3 taskforce drawing their own boundaries, the Councilmember went for a more rational path this time.

And as a PP noted, they followed the instructions given by the DC Office of Planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the idea of piloting the road reconfiguration, provided it could be done quickly and recognizing it would really only tell us about the impact on cars and not bikes.

It's unclear that the Save Connecticut Ave people have the capacity to understand this.

I mean, I think it's pretty clear that they do and that they (and Nick Ide) are just proposing it as a delay tactic. It's no different than all the B's the poor couple who wanted to split a 30,000 SQ ft plot into two in forest hills had to deal with. In fact, if you look at the people who are complaining about both Conn Ave and that split, you'll find a lot of folks in common.

I was thinking about something else in common: in Cleveland Park there is a huge overlap between the loudest proponents of constraining Connecticut Avenue, the Smart Growth lobby, and those who relentlessly pushed the ANC gerrymandering plan to split the neighborhood.

You mean "those who followed Council's redistricting directions to the letter and worked to undo prior gerrymandering." You can call it a gerrymander if you want, but doing so is sour grapes. It was completely legal redistricting that did not split census blocks, as required by law. The alternative maps your side presented didn't even take into account what would happen to the rest of Ward 3 if your preferred Cleveland Park gerrymander had been adopted. It wasn't until the third or fourth iteration, after oddly getting specific help from the Office of Planning, that you all could even get a map together that got the population numbers right.

My side’s maps? Most folks in CP are aware of how the same small group got themselves appointed to write the rules and rig the game, all in the name of electing an ANC that would happily comply with their agenda.

???

Mary Cheh appointed people from across the Ward. After the fustercluck of the 2011 redistricting which saw ANC commissioners serving on the Ward 3 taskforce drawing their own boundaries, the Councilmember went for a more rational path this time.

And as a PP noted, they followed the instructions given by the DC Office of Planning.

It was never quite explained how three people all aligned with “Smart Growth” were appointed as the sole members for a single ANC (3C) when a number of other qualified individuals applied to be task force members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

Sorry, I don't read the classified ads in El Tiempo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

Serniors have phones and internet?

I mean, these are volunteers. Do you expect them to knock on every door and hand deliver a gold-plated agenda for every issue and meeting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

The private parking lots in each of the commercial areas are not going anywhere. There will always be quick and convenient parking. Maybe you are talking about FREE PARKING? In which case, no, those days are likely over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

The private parking lots in each of the commercial areas are not going anywhere. There will always be quick and convenient parking. Maybe you are talking about FREE PARKING? In which case, no, those days are likely over.

No, metered street parking. And WABA’s own statements admit that 50 percent of Connecticut Ave street parking will be eliminated as the result of the bike lane reconfiguration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

The private parking lots in each of the commercial areas are not going anywhere. There will always be quick and convenient parking. Maybe you are talking about FREE PARKING? In which case, no, those days are likely over.

No, metered street parking. And WABA’s own statements admit that 50 percent of Connecticut Ave street parking will be eliminated as the result of the bike lane reconfiguration.

So?

Most of that parking is used by employees of the business, not customers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was a nice update

https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact

"Piñeiro’s presentation also listed potential locations for DDOT traffic calming reviews on neighborhood streets due to concerns about cut-through traffic. Those include Reno Road at 41st Street, Chevy Chase Parkway, Nevada Avenue, Utah Avenue, Broad Branch Road/Beach Drive, Linnean Avenue and Albemarle Street."

Those are the streets that will bear the brunt of the impact of the displaced traffic and increased congestion.

Not a single location in Cleveland Park? DDOT is dumber than we thought.

Cleveland Park gets hurt but those streets get totally screwed. Reno and Beach will get almost all the displaced traffic and that's how traffic will get there. Ironically their ANCs are among the biggest cheerleaders and their ANCs almost all got an election challenger because of it.

34th St goes right through the heart of Cleveland Park alongside Eaton school. Several other schools are close by. The Bob Ward/Smart Growth majority on the Cleveland Park ANC also fell into line and voted for the Connecticut cluster$&@!. However, one incumbent seems vulnerable because of his cheerleading.

It is insane how many schools are directly in the line of fire. Yet they keep saying that this is about safety, that people were told and that it's wildly popular. Turns out it isn't,they weren't and it's not . What a surprise. Just wait until the solutions get unveiled. It will only get worse.

Macomb and Garfield will also get reamed.

Just keep on making stuff up . .

Please do explain what was made up.

Are schools not on those streets?
Is safety not a claimed reason?
Are people in those areas not upset?
Is the lack of communication from their ANC not one of the main issues?
Are Macomb and Garfield not going to get increased traffic because of this?

I am a DP, but the ANCs put out newsletters, agendas, emails listserv posts, social media posts, etc. If you weren't notified, that isn't their fault.

That really depends on the individual ANC doesn't it? Your experience is different than mine which is different from someone else. You do not know what any ANC did besides your own and even then you do not know if someone a few blocks from you gets the same level of service. So please, stop trying to claim something is true that you have no way of knowing. It is a fact that the main issue of contention in one of those races is the lack of communication from the ANC in question.

Which ANC failed its notice requirements? If you're in Cleveland Park, ANC 3C put out its bike lane resolution for public comment at least a week before its meeting.

No one has said that they didn't fulfill the technical requirements of a legal notice. There is a huge difference between legal notice, which is nothing more than stating on their website that a meeting is occurring, and actually informing people that something so important was happening.

The continued ultra-defensiveness, parsing about legal notice and haranguing reveal a lot.

So you are admitting you received notice with links to agendas and resolutions and chose to ignore them? But are complaining about it now?

Try reading and stop playing games. A classified ad in the City Paper would count as legal notice. That doesn't mean that anybody would see it unless they were specifically looking for it.

These were posted on the neighborhood listserv, on social media and heck, there is a 100+ page thread about the topic that is different than this one, that had discussion and posting about it. If you can partake in this forum, then you knew about it then.

And yet, you still complain.

There was never any outreach to the senior communities along Connecticut Avenue where residents may care a lot about catching a bus or a cab, quick convenient parking near stores, and not being hit by a speeding bike when trying to navigate between the sidewalk and the curb. And I doubt that seniors are on Twitter and Instagram as much.

The private parking lots in each of the commercial areas are not going anywhere. There will always be quick and convenient parking. Maybe you are talking about FREE PARKING? In which case, no, those days are likely over.

No, metered street parking. And WABA’s own statements admit that 50 percent of Connecticut Ave street parking will be eliminated as the result of the bike lane reconfiguration.

So?

Most of that parking is used by employees of the business, not customers.

No. But if so, who cares about the employees? Let them use rideshare or one of those little scooters, eh?

[Anonymous]

Connecticut Ave businesses (at least in Cleveland Pk) in a survey conducted by the mayor’s office cited lack of available customer parking as their number 1 business challenge by far. And now DDOT plans to make an existing problem worse — 50 percent worse?! That’s insane.