Well said. People don't want to get stuck so they make their plans well in advance and nothing moves. |
Not the prior poster, but DDOT has released several traffic studies of Conn Ave and every one of them showed that the outer lanes were ***FAR*** less utilized by drivers than the middle two lanes, because of the turning traffic or random parked cars that shouldn't be there but are constantly. |
There's only three lanes now and two for that particular stretch because of the streetery. Besides all the lanes on Connecticut and Nebraska are bumper to bumper during rush hour and there are lots of turnoffs in all four directions. It is a really bad location for this experiment and a perfect example of what will happen to the entire road if these plans to eliminate another lane go through. |
Great, maybe people will drive less then. |
Dear bike bro who lives in Navy Yard and can’t afford a car so pretends like he doesn’t want one: I live just north if this clusterfuk, a block off Connecticut in DC, where I experience all the spillover/bailing out of the designated arterial road onto a local road. |
As someone who has commuted down DT for nearly 30 years by car, I can explain what DDOT saw: cars bail out of the far right lane to avoid things like buses, bikes, parked cars, turning cars, and the F’in streetery. It’s dangerous to have cars weaving in and out of traffic. I hope ddot doesn’t think the 3rd lane is necessary. It’s critical. #duh No clue why anyone thought it was a good idea to randomly block off a lane on CT freaking Ave so one stupid restaurant can seat diners in the street. Anyway, it’s time to get rid of this obstacle that impedes traffic. |
You are not a serious person. |
The eatery is not in a turn only lane. It's blocking a regular straight lane. And anyone who does want to turn right after the eatery has to move left and then move right again quickly after the eatery. This is a location heavily trafficked by school children walking to school and residents of the elder care home. Lots of lane changing right there, with limited vision heading up to it, is unnecessarily dangerous. For what purpose? Is a handful of extra seats at one restaurant really worth this risk? |
Not worth it. Unless they want to pay a street hogging premium and make it worth it. |
100% serious. In an urban area like this one, the amount of people and money funnelling into personal automobile usage is stupid. |
Two lanes slow traffic more than three lanes, so the street with a streetery is actually better for little Timmy crossing it than one without it. |
You're still not a serious person. |
Super serious - way more than you, Mr or Ms-Streets-Should-Only-Be-Designed-to-Move-Cars-As-Quickly-As-Possible-And-The-46,000-People-Per-Year-Who-Die-Because-of-That-Choice-Are-Just-The-Price-of-Convenience! Sometimes things that are "no brainer" unhealthy habits for both the individual doing it and the public around them do change after society recognizes the full ramifications of those choices.
|
| What is the status of the petitions the restaurants rallied the community to sign ? Does anyone know ? Could the owner(s) chime in ? |
I don't know but DDOT put up one of those big traffic signs to indicate the lane is closed. It makes the situation even worse for Eddie Cano but slightly ameliorates the major safety problem. |