Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

But they are losing those spaces at the corners to increase visibility and the turning lanes, no? Not for the bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

You clearly have no understanding of business. Many businesses, including restaurants, operate on slim margins, which is one reason why most restaurants fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My vote personally would be ban bikes on Connecticut but ban cars on Reno and make it bikes only.

You realize the whole point is not only accessing downtown but for internneighborhood mobility, right? I mean, how does one get to a place like Vace if they don't ride on Connecticut Avenue? And all those houses that have driveways on Reno Road, how will that work?

Well, you could bike to the corner of Connecticut and Macomb, lock your bike there, and then walk across the street to Vace. The houses on Reno with driveways are more of an issue, but at least some of them also seem to have alley access behind the house.

And here I thought the bike lanes were bad because they would make it harder for people to patronize the stores and restaurants on Connecticut Ave...

Exactly, the opposition, many of them Maryland residents, want to make it easier for their commute and harder for those of us who live here to patronize our commercial areas.

Not to be too pendantic but keeping things the way they are does not make anything easier or harder. It makes it the same.

There's just not enough demand to support such a radical experiment. Less than 1% bike on Connecticut. We're shutting down circulator routes to save $7 million because not enough people use them. But its ridership numbers are exponentially higher and its cost is multiples less than the bike lane idea. It makes no logical sense.

I and my family regularly eat at the restaurants along the Avenue in DC. If we can't drive and park, we are eating elsewhere. Pretty simple. I hear MD and VA have some good restaurants.

How often do you park on CT Ave proper? That is the real question. And I can say from decades of living in Ward 3 and supporting businesses on CT Ave, that I never park ON CT Ave to support those businesses.

I regularly park along CT Ave to do business there. Of course, I sometimes need to park on the side streets, which no doubt the neighbors like because it takes aware their parking spaces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

Side street parking that is already tight and already causes people to circle. Combine that with the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets from removing traffic lanes and it gets even worse. Ironically the Uptown closing is a good thing for this plan because it reduces the amount of people circling for parking. The only way this plan works is if a bunch of businesses go belly up and the strip gets redeveloped to right size.

Really the only way this pipe dream plan works is if MPD dedicates a detachment of officers to ticket cars and trucks that will inevitably regularly park in the bike lanes as they do everywhere else in the city. Which is, of course, ironic because the bike lane crowd is also largely the defund the police crowd which is responsible for the sharp drop in number of officers needed to make their dream come true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My vote personally would be ban bikes on Connecticut but ban cars on Reno and make it bikes only.

You realize the whole point is not only accessing downtown but for internneighborhood mobility, right? I mean, how does one get to a place like Vace if they don't ride on Connecticut Avenue? And all those houses that have driveways on Reno Road, how will that work?

Well, you could bike to the corner of Connecticut and Macomb, lock your bike there, and then walk across the street to Vace. The houses on Reno with driveways are more of an issue, but at least some of them also seem to have alley access behind the house.

And here I thought the bike lanes were bad because they would make it harder for people to patronize the stores and restaurants on Connecticut Ave...

Exactly, the opposition, many of them Maryland residents, want to make it easier for their commute and harder for those of us who live here to patronize our commercial areas.

Not to be too pendantic but keeping things the way they are does not make anything easier or harder. It makes it the same.

There's just not enough demand to support such a radical experiment. Less than 1% bike on Connecticut. We're shutting down circulator routes to save $7 million because not enough people use them. But its ridership numbers are exponentially higher and its cost is multiples less than the bike lane idea. It makes no logical sense.

I and my family regularly eat at the restaurants along the Avenue in DC. If we can't drive and park, we are eating elsewhere. Pretty simple. I hear MD and VA have some good restaurants.

OK, so go eat elsewhere. DC shouldn't base its transportation policy on your personal preferences.

Many DC restaurants depend on suburbanites for their business. Not enough DC residents. [DC's population is still below what it was in the 1950s, and DC is no longer growing.]

Broadly true, but D.C.'s population is growing again now, actually: https://dcist.com/story/22/12/26/dc-new-census-numbers-population-increase/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

You clearly have no understanding of business. Many businesses, including restaurants, operate on slim margins, which is one reason why most restaurants fail.

and we all know that no restaurant ever survives unless it has ample parking. lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

you’re literally describing an urban area. you seem confused about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

Side street parking that is already tight and already causes people to circle. Combine that with the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets from removing traffic lanes and it gets even worse. Ironically the Uptown closing is a good thing for this plan because it reduces the amount of people circling for parking. The only way this plan works is if a bunch of businesses go belly up and the strip gets redeveloped to right size.

Really the only way this pipe dream plan works is if MPD dedicates a detachment of officers to ticket cars and trucks that will inevitably regularly park in the bike lanes as they do everywhere else in the city. Which is, of course, ironic because the bike lane crowd is also largely the defund the police crowd which is responsible for the sharp drop in number of officers needed to make their dream come true.

No, this is not true. The majority of the traffic safety (including bike lanes) people speak frequently about their frustration with lack of enforcement. Things like speed cameras and red light cameras come up frequently, as well as MPD failures to enforce. There are some transit advocates that are also police reform advocates, but there is far from a complete overlap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

Side street parking that is already tight and already causes people to circle. Combine that with the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets from removing traffic lanes and it gets even worse. Ironically the Uptown closing is a good thing for this plan because it reduces the amount of people circling for parking. The only way this plan works is if a bunch of businesses go belly up and the strip gets redeveloped to right size.

Really the only way this pipe dream plan works is if MPD dedicates a detachment of officers to ticket cars and trucks that will inevitably regularly park in the bike lanes as they do everywhere else in the city. Which is, of course, ironic because the bike lane crowd is also largely the defund the police crowd which is responsible for the sharp drop in number of officers needed to make their dream come true.

No, this is not true. The majority of the traffic safety (including bike lanes) people speak frequently about their frustration with lack of enforcement. Things like speed cameras and red light cameras come up frequently, as well as MPD failures to enforce. There are some transit advocates that are also police reform advocates, but there is far from a complete overlap.

Every ANC Commissioner that is pro bike lane was also a cheerleader for the pro-crime criminal code rewrite. Every one of them. 100% overlap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

Side street parking that is already tight and already causes people to circle. Combine that with the increased congestion on both Connecticut and the side streets from removing traffic lanes and it gets even worse. Ironically the Uptown closing is a good thing for this plan because it reduces the amount of people circling for parking. The only way this plan works is if a bunch of businesses go belly up and the strip gets redeveloped to right size.

Really the only way this pipe dream plan works is if MPD dedicates a detachment of officers to ticket cars and trucks that will inevitably regularly park in the bike lanes as they do everywhere else in the city. Which is, of course, ironic because the bike lane crowd is also largely the defund the police crowd which is responsible for the sharp drop in number of officers needed to make their dream come true.

No, this is not true. The majority of the traffic safety (including bike lanes) people speak frequently about their frustration with lack of enforcement. Things like speed cameras and red light cameras come up frequently, as well as MPD failures to enforce. There are some transit advocates that are also police reform advocates, but there is far from a complete overlap.

Every ANC Commissioner that is pro bike lane was also a cheerleader for the pro-crime criminal code rewrite. Every one of them. 100% overlap.

When you call the criminal code rewrite pro crime you don't do yourself any favors.8

[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:My vote personally would be ban bikes on Connecticut but ban cars on Reno and make it bikes only.

You realize the whole point is not only accessing downtown but for internneighborhood mobility, right? I mean, how does one get to a place like Vace if they don't ride on Connecticut Avenue? And all those houses that have driveways on Reno Road, how will that work?

Well, you could bike to the corner of Connecticut and Macomb, lock your bike there, and then walk across the street to Vace. The houses on Reno with driveways are more of an issue, but at least some of them also seem to have alley access behind the house.

And here I thought the bike lanes were bad because they would make it harder for people to patronize the stores and restaurants on Connecticut Ave...

Exactly, the opposition, many of them Maryland residents, want to make it easier for their commute and harder for those of us who live here to patronize our commercial areas.

Not to be too pendantic but keeping things the way they are does not make anything easier or harder. It makes it the same.

There's just not enough demand to support such a radical experiment. Less than 1% bike on Connecticut. We're shutting down circulator routes to save $7 million because not enough people use them. But its ridership numbers are exponentially higher and its cost is multiples less than the bike lane idea. It makes no logical sense.

I and my family regularly eat at the restaurants along the Avenue in DC. If we can't drive and park, we are eating elsewhere. Pretty simple. I hear MD and VA have some good restaurants.

How often do you park on CT Ave proper? That is the real question. And I can say from decades of living in Ward 3 and supporting businesses on CT Ave, that I never park ON CT Ave to support those businesses.

I often walk to the Conn Ave strip for dinner, but I usually drive if I'm picking up takeout, buying groceries, buying lasagne from Vace's, and I almost always park on CT. I like to patronize local stores, but if I can't park, I'll have to drive elsewhere.

Hello, I don’t think parking spots will be taken away by the project? But it certainly takes a certain kind of attitude to think you are entitled to park wherever you want *in a city.* It’s a city, not a mall.

I don't think I'm entitled to parking or anything else. Just saying how the lack of parking might affect my behavior. Yes, sometimes I walk the mile to Vace's or other places on the strip, but I don't always do so if I'm in a rush and I never carry a big grocery order on foot. If parking goes away, I'm less likely to make those trips unless I have time to walk and the weather is good. That means a loss of business. Perhaps there are bikers who would balance out that loss of business. I can't speak to that.

As it is, one can almost never park on CT Ave during regular business hours because cars park there all day, and cannot also park during Rush Hour (or couldn't until recently) - so it is highly unlikely that being car dependent and going to the Cleveland Park strip with an eye to parking ON Connecticut Avenue each trip is simply highly an improbably low level of success.

Both pre- and post-COVID, I have always found it relatively easy to find a parking spot along the stretch of Connecticut in front of the Cleveland Park strip during the day and often at night as well, especially if I timed my arrival for the end of rush hour parking. I have three kids who often have to be in different places within short time spans of each other so I need to be as efficient as possible. I often pick up a prescription or dry cleaning, return books at the library, mail something at the post office, etc...on my way to or from dropping one of the kids off and find a spot on Connecticut to do that errand. It's rare that I can't find a space (although I don't bother trying on spring and summer weekends when there are big Zoo crowds).

The vast majority of ANC Commissioners don’t have kids and do not intend to have kids. They have no insight into your life and the challenges it takes to raise a family in DC. Frankly they don’t even care.

Yes, that is abundantly clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the restaurants believe they can operate a business with only customers who live within a mile or two, then more power to them. I doubt that's the case, which is why most oppose eliminating parking in favor of bike lanes.

Each neighborhood commercial area is losing like 20 spaces. If the 20 businesses rely on those 20 spaces to make the diffrerrence in their bottom line, then they are running too fine a razor's edge for profitability. Most customers are walking, biking, metro-ing or parking on a side street.

But they are losing those spaces at the corners to increase visibility and the turning lanes, no? Not for the bike lanes.

After bike lanes are installed, there will be parking on one side of the street only, not on both sides.

[Anonymous]

And these ANC commissioners HATE single family home dwellers. At a meeting this week, the chair of 3C proposed getting rid of residential trash pick up for SFH dwellers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And these ANC commissioners HATE single family home dwellers. At a meeting this week, the chair of 3C proposed getting rid of residential trash pick up for SFH dwellers.

I would like to think you are making this up, but based on past experiences, I’m afraid that it’s true. What’s the justification for it besides single family=evil?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And these ANC commissioners HATE single family home dwellers. At a meeting this week, the chair of 3C proposed getting rid of residential trash pick up for SFH dwellers.

Where does this person live? What do these residents need to do in their mind? Bring trash to the dump?