Privatizing DC roads?!: Chain Bridge Rd and University Terr

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly. And it was the arrogant public rants of one of their mainstays that prompted the outrage and backlash. Should have kept quiet. Look them up; they’ve been embroiled in a lawsuit after lawsuit, most recently to prevent beehives.

This was an attempt to privatize the roads and block out the riff raff; the irony of course being that these streets have lost their charm through uncontrolled overdevelopment and expansion of a flight path. With a plane overhead every 90 seconds, they are fighting the neighbors and other DMV folk driving through?!

Can you tell me more about the beehive lawsuit? As best as I can tell, the developer who bought up swathes of Chain Bridge but has been prevented from doing anything tried to install an apiary?

[Anonymous]

How I see it is that if you’re in w the old boy network you can develop away which is how we ended up w the behemoths that extend onto the street and you can touch the next house from the mansion next door, no joke. But if you’re not in, there’s no development, no driving, no walking… meanwhile the streets are losing their character and I pity the poor souls who sunk millions into living under what’s become an unbearable flight path. The preservation group is a vestige of a different time (and century) and, while perhaps a bit unfair, the issues they try to push like this poor excuse for privatizing a road, are a lightning rod for the fairly justified outrage. I was actually shocked they tried to do this now, and knew it would end in tears. Could have kept quiet and enjoyed the streets. As it is, they drew such attention to the streets and themselves that they’ll have more traffic than before, no measure will pass, and even if it did, by hook and crook, it would be unenforceable. All one needs to say is they wish to visit the graveyard or the park. I am shocked by the arrogance: get Cheh to pass it in her lame duck days, hold a hearing in August — had they wanted to look more shady they couldn’t have done worse… and that is the seamy side of the Kent underwear folks. For me, my neighbor posting nonsense and serially suing people is what did it. I will be suspicious of anything they do and the group should be disbanded—it’s a segregationist embarrassment in my opinion

[Anonymous]

Petty birthed pity. Real estate prices to follow the general seedy-ward trend of the neighborhood. Suck it up buttercup. Do onto others…. Lesson there

[Anonymous]

The number of times the neighbors walking around their own landscaping trucks in the middle of the road hissed at my dark-skinned spouse (literally) for driving at (confirmed) 15 mph in the 20 mph zone. I wonder why. It must be b/c it’s so dangerous there that they’ve fought sidewalks and speed bumps for years. You won’t privatize it on my watch, this is now personal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How I see it is that if you’re in w the old boy network you can develop away which is how we ended up w the behemoths that extend onto the street and you can touch the next house from the mansion next door, no joke. But if you’re not in, there’s no development, no driving, no walking… meanwhile the streets are losing their character and I pity the poor souls who sunk millions into living under what’s become an unbearable flight path. The preservation group is a vestige of a different time (and century) and, while perhaps a bit unfair, the issues they try to push like this poor excuse for privatizing a road, are a lightning rod for the fairly justified outrage. I was actually shocked they tried to do this now, and knew it would end in tears. Could have kept quiet and enjoyed the streets. As it is, they drew such attention to the streets and themselves that they’ll have more traffic than before, no measure will pass, and even if it did, by hook and crook, it would be unenforceable. All one needs to say is they wish to visit the graveyard or the park. I am shocked by the arrogance: get Cheh to pass it in her lame duck days, hold a hearing in August — had they wanted to look more shady they couldn’t have done worse… and that is the seamy side of the Kent underwear folks. For me, my neighbor posting nonsense and serially suing people is what did it. I will be suspicious of anything they do and the group should be disbanded—it’s a segregationist embarrassment in my opinion

yes the preservation group is an embarrassment, Funny now, many years after imposing strict tree removal rules to "maintain the character" of the neighborhood, some ageing members of the group realize that they have hurt the resale value of their properties and are trying to have the rules relaxed

[Anonymous]

I'm not a fan!

[Anonymous]

DC 295 should be tolled to the Maryland Line from the 695 interchange.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Awesome! Can we get more? And can other neighborhoods get in on this action?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Awesome! Can we get more? And can other neighborhoods get in on this action?

Nothing says “you are welcome here” more than speed humps on SFH streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Might as well put them on every street and all get SUVs at this point. They have popped up all over the place in NW this summer. There's only goong to be more of them if people don't say anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Might as well put them on every street and all get SUVs at this point. They have popped up all over the place in NW this summer. There's only goong to be more of them if people don't say anything.

I’ll say something!

More speed bumps, please!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Might as well put them on every street and all get SUVs at this point. They have popped up all over the place in NW this summer. There's only goong to be more of them if people don't say anything.

I’ll say something!

More speed bumps, please!

As we can see, there's a very persistent and vocal minority. Unfortunately they are being listened to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s what the CBR-UT Preservation Committee wants you to believe. Those of us personally involved in this issue know that the leaders have been privately (and, sometimes reluctantly, publicly) pushing for this closure for years. They’ve also opposed sidewalks and speed humps for years.

This is not overblown. Be a more skeptical reader.

Exactly right.

More speed bumps going up on Cleveland Park streets. How do folks feel about that?

Might as well put them on every street and all get SUVs at this point. They have popped up all over the place in NW this summer. There's only goong to be more of them if people don't say anything.

I’ll say something!

More speed bumps, please!

As we can see, there's a very persistent and vocal minority. Unfortunately they are being listened to.

Excellent!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well we won. DDOT received so many comments against they turned down the no thru traffic proposal. You tried your best, but the times, they’re a changing!

What gave the game away that they didn't really care about safety is that when people suggested changes that would actually lead to safety -- speed bumps, speed cameras, and above all sidewalks -- they were rejected because they would inconvenience the residents too much!

+1