Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Why should Connecticut Ave be the "major artery." The logical solution is to shift the traffic to Reno Rd, which is less-densely populated and can be widened. It can be the main N-S route for thru traffic. This is a necessary transportation planning adjustment if Connecticut is to become a multi-modal vibrant urban "Main Street.}"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m ok w bike lanes, but frankly not that and parking. Also can’t we borrow some of that generous sidewalk like in Berlin, Amsterdam and Geneva?

The full parking is a temporary measure being proposed by Frumin in his letter. When DDOT finishes with the new configuraton, there would generally be parking on one side of the street, 24/7 - something that doesn't happen currently.

The Frumin proposal is actually smart. Consider it a pilot of what Connecticut Avenue will be like (and to measure resulting traffic diversion) if the two bike lanes and permanent narrowing of vehicle lanes from 6 to 4 takes place (Option C). If the pilot works out well and there is negligible impact, great. However, if there is more gridlock on Connecticut Ave and traffic diversion to the side streets, then we will know that also and DDOT can avert a costly disaster to implement Option C. The other reality is that if local businesses, residents and visitors come to expect more parking availability even at rush hours, it will be much harder for DDOT to take all that that away later for 2 bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Connecticut Avenue is actually part of the National Highway System”. Making it LITERALLY a Highway.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/district_of_columbia/dc_districtofcolumbia.pdf

[Anonymous]

Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Why should Connecticut Ave be the "major artery." The logical solution is to shift the traffic to Reno Rd, which is less-densely populated and can be widened. It can be the main N-S route for thru traffic. This is a necessary transportation planning adjustment if Connecticut is to become a multi-modal vibrant urban "Main Street.}"

Please please show me how you would widen the Reno and make it less of a shitshow it is today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m ok w bike lanes, but frankly not that and parking. Also can’t we borrow some of that generous sidewalk like in Berlin, Amsterdam and Geneva?

The full parking is a temporary measure being proposed by Frumin in his letter. When DDOT finishes with the new configuraton, there would generally be parking on one side of the street, 24/7 - something that doesn't happen currently.

The Frumin proposal is actually smart. Consider it a pilot of what Connecticut Avenue will be like (and to measure resulting traffic diversion) if the two bike lanes and permanent narrowing of vehicle lanes from 6 to 4 takes place (Option C). If the pilot works out well and there is negligible impact, great. However, if there is more gridlock on Connecticut Ave and traffic diversion to the side streets, then we will know that also and DDOT can avert a costly disaster to implement Option C. The other reality is that if local businesses, residents and visitors come to expect more parking availability even at rush hours, it will be much harder for DDOT to take all that that away later for 2 bike lanes.

No it’s not. The man has turned out to be an idiot. Eric will get my vote.
It’s a highway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Connecticut Avenue is actually part of the National Highway System”. Making it LITERALLY a Highway.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/district_of_columbia/dc_districtofcolumbia.pdf

+1

Talk on last century folk

[Anonymous]

Matt didn’t ask anyone in our entire street for an opinion before writing this idiocy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Connecticut Avenue is actually part of the National Highway System”. Making it LITERALLY a Highway.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/district_of_columbia/dc_districtofcolumbia.pdf

Can we start a legal challenge in Congress? Seeing how it’s a federal highway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Matt didn’t ask anyone in our entire street for an opinion before writing this idiocy

If we had a fraction of the 1000 police officers doing traffic enforcement that he and his pals defunded instead this project would never even exist.

[Anonymous]

But you guys, it’s literally a highway. There’s no traffic calming or enforcement. It’s choked enough as it is. Just add a bike line by taking out one sidewalk. Toss a coin.

[Anonymous]

Also no parking, park on the side streets. That will quiet down any opposition.

Six lanes. A breeze. A bike lane on a sidewalk.

I should run for office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Connecticut Avenue is actually part of the National Highway System”. Making it LITERALLY a Highway.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/district_of_columbia/dc_districtofcolumbia.pdf

What kind of sicko walks their dog on a Highway?

[Anonymous]

An urban NIMBY.

Get your dog off my highway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a good idea. I agree, we shouldn't have a 6 lane highway as our city street. Adding the parking back should be supported by the anti-bikelane people as it should help boost businesses, right?

It’s not a city street. It’s a major artery, a highway if you will.

No, it is a city street. It is where I walk my dog, get my food, socialize with my neighbors, etc. It is not a highway and shouldn't be treated as one.

Connecticut Avenue is actually part of the National Highway System”. Making it LITERALLY a Highway.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/district_of_columbia/dc_districtofcolumbia.pdf

Can we start a legal challenge in Congress? Seeing how it’s a federal highway

Anyone with insight on this? They are well primed after the fiasco of the century.