Options for opposing Connecticut Avenue changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading the comments on the upzoning post here as well as on my neighborhood email list about the changes that have been approved for Connecticut Avenue, I'm frustrated that I wasn't aware that the city was considering such significant changes. Now that I know about it, I'm wondering if there is a chance the decision could be reversed or greatly modified? For those of us who are just now realizing what's planned and are very concerned about how the changes will affect daily life for nearby residents and for commuters trying to get downtown or to schools, what's the best way to ask to have the decision reconsidered? Straight to the Mayor? To City Council reps? Who are the decisionmakers that need to be reached? I'm not looking to debate the issue here. If the neighborhood email discussion is any model, it won't be productive. Instead I'm asking for direction on who you should talk to if you oppose the plan and whether it's too late to make any difference. Please no comments about how I should have known about it sooner. Over the past two years I've been keeping a small business going while trying to manage two kids under 6 during COVID and caring for a terminally ill parent. While I wish I could have been following local issues more closely, I couldn't until now.

Bike lanes are for single people with no kids -anyone with kids is not commuting on a bike

You clearly do not see the people riding with kids in cargo bikes, or people riding on a bike with their kid on a bike in tow. This happens a lot. Particularly in the areas around Eaton, Murch, Janney and Lafayette, at least that I see first hand.

Like on the side streets and in the neighborhoods? The places where you are purposefully trying to increase traffic?

It's interesting how nobody seems to want more cars on "side streets and in the neighborhoods." But more bikes would be fine there, I guess? It's almost like cars have lots of bad effects on the public (for example, noise, air pollution, danger) that bikes don't have.

Cars are dangerous for pedestrians, residents and bicyclists. Cars, should be kept on major thoroughfares going into and out of the city. You want more bicycle and pedestrians to be on the side streets where residents can be impacted by traffic, congestion and pollution. So you want to keep the traffic, congestion and pollution in a channel going in and out rather than a delta that spreads out from the main thoroughfare. It is much safer for everyone to have cars in limited pathways and have the pedestrians and bicycles on the side streets.

Bicycles traveling on the main thoroughfare is a convenience for the bicyclists, but is not good for safety or traffic flow.

Bikes on thoroughfares because that is where the businesses we are supporting are located. WTF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just heard that CT bike lanes are officially on hold. Is that correct?

Not from what I heard, though the DDOT Director leaving may delay things a little.

Connecticut Avenue bike lanes are on hold until 2027 at least. Option "C" stands for "Cancelled."

Not according to anyone I have spoken to at DDOT. Please stop spreading fake news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading the comments on the upzoning post here as well as on my neighborhood email list about the changes that have been approved for Connecticut Avenue, I'm frustrated that I wasn't aware that the city was considering such significant changes. Now that I know about it, I'm wondering if there is a chance the decision could be reversed or greatly modified? For those of us who are just now realizing what's planned and are very concerned about how the changes will affect daily life for nearby residents and for commuters trying to get downtown or to schools, what's the best way to ask to have the decision reconsidered? Straight to the Mayor? To City Council reps? Who are the decisionmakers that need to be reached? I'm not looking to debate the issue here. If the neighborhood email discussion is any model, it won't be productive. Instead I'm asking for direction on who you should talk to if you oppose the plan and whether it's too late to make any difference. Please no comments about how I should have known about it sooner. Over the past two years I've been keeping a small business going while trying to manage two kids under 6 during COVID and caring for a terminally ill parent. While I wish I could have been following local issues more closely, I couldn't until now.

Bike lanes are for single people with no kids -anyone with kids is not commuting on a bike

You clearly do not see the people riding with kids in cargo bikes, or people riding on a bike with their kid on a bike in tow. This happens a lot. Particularly in the areas around Eaton, Murch, Janney and Lafayette, at least that I see first hand.

Like on the side streets and in the neighborhoods? The places where you are purposefully trying to increase traffic?

It's interesting how nobody seems to want more cars on "side streets and in the neighborhoods." But more bikes would be fine there, I guess? It's almost like cars have lots of bad effects on the public (for example, noise, air pollution, danger) that bikes don't have.

Cars are dangerous for pedestrians, residents and bicyclists. Cars, should be kept on major thoroughfares going into and out of the city. You want more bicycle and pedestrians to be on the side streets where residents can be impacted by traffic, congestion and pollution. So you want to keep the traffic, congestion and pollution in a channel going in and out rather than a delta that spreads out from the main thoroughfare. It is much safer for everyone to have cars in limited pathways and have the pedestrians and bicycles on the side streets.

Bicycles traveling on the main thoroughfare is a convenience for the bicyclists, but is not good for safety or traffic flow.

Bikes on thoroughfares because that is where the businesses we are supporting are located. WTF.

I like bike lanes. But Virginia wouldn't take away a couple of lanes of I-66 to build bike lanes, just as Maryland wouldn't narrow I-270 to build them. Fortunately, NW DC is not bisected by the busy interstate highways that were proposed in the Fifties and Sixties. However, major arterial roads like Connecticut Avenue serve as those through routes to downtown. The logic of constraining them to build bike lanes is nutty, as that will just squeeze traffic on to neighborhood streets that are not designed to handle it. It would be better to paint bike lanes on the quieter streets where bike riders would be safer and residents would not have to deal with diversion of significant numbers of vehicles pushed off Connecticut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just heard that CT bike lanes are officially on hold. Is that correct?

Not from what I heard, though the DDOT Director leaving may delay things a little.

Connecticut Avenue bike lanes are on hold until 2027 at least. Option "C" stands for "Cancelled."

I remember reading on this forum, in December 2022/January 2023, that according to official information, the Old Georgetown bike lanes would be ripped out and gone by summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading the comments on the upzoning post here as well as on my neighborhood email list about the changes that have been approved for Connecticut Avenue, I'm frustrated that I wasn't aware that the city was considering such significant changes. Now that I know about it, I'm wondering if there is a chance the decision could be reversed or greatly modified? For those of us who are just now realizing what's planned and are very concerned about how the changes will affect daily life for nearby residents and for commuters trying to get downtown or to schools, what's the best way to ask to have the decision reconsidered? Straight to the Mayor? To City Council reps? Who are the decisionmakers that need to be reached? I'm not looking to debate the issue here. If the neighborhood email discussion is any model, it won't be productive. Instead I'm asking for direction on who you should talk to if you oppose the plan and whether it's too late to make any difference. Please no comments about how I should have known about it sooner. Over the past two years I've been keeping a small business going while trying to manage two kids under 6 during COVID and caring for a terminally ill parent. While I wish I could have been following local issues more closely, I couldn't until now.

Bike lanes are for single people with no kids -anyone with kids is not commuting on a bike

You clearly do not see the people riding with kids in cargo bikes, or people riding on a bike with their kid on a bike in tow. This happens a lot. Particularly in the areas around Eaton, Murch, Janney and Lafayette, at least that I see first hand.

Like on the side streets and in the neighborhoods? The places where you are purposefully trying to increase traffic?

It's interesting how nobody seems to want more cars on "side streets and in the neighborhoods." But more bikes would be fine there, I guess? It's almost like cars have lots of bad effects on the public (for example, noise, air pollution, danger) that bikes don't have.

Cars are dangerous for pedestrians, residents and bicyclists. Cars, should be kept on major thoroughfares going into and out of the city. You want more bicycle and pedestrians to be on the side streets where residents can be impacted by traffic, congestion and pollution. So you want to keep the traffic, congestion and pollution in a channel going in and out rather than a delta that spreads out from the main thoroughfare. It is much safer for everyone to have cars in limited pathways and have the pedestrians and bicycles on the side streets.

Bicycles traveling on the main thoroughfare is a convenience for the bicyclists, but is not good for safety or traffic flow.

Bikes on thoroughfares because that is where the businesses we are supporting are located. WTF.

I like bike lanes. But Virginia wouldn't take away a couple of lanes of I-66 to build bike lanes, just as Maryland wouldn't narrow I-270 to build them. Fortunately, NW DC is not bisected by the busy interstate highways that were proposed in the Fifties and Sixties. However, major arterial roads like Connecticut Avenue serve as those through routes to downtown. The logic of constraining them to build bike lanes is nutty, as that will just squeeze traffic on to neighborhood streets that are not designed to handle it. It would be better to paint bike lanes on the quieter streets where bike riders would be safer and residents would not have to deal with diversion of significant numbers of vehicles pushed off Connecticut.

Are there a lot of stores, residences, and public facilities (for example, libraries) on the sides of I-66 and I-270?

[Anonymous]

Reno Rd would be a perfect spot for dedicated bike lanes. Get rid of the center turn lane and there's room to put bike lanes on the sides. Cylists can then take east-west streets to easily reach destinations in Tenleytown, Cleveland Park, Cathedral Heights, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reno Rd would be a perfect spot for dedicated bike lanes. Get rid of the center turn lane and there's room to put bike lanes on the sides. Cylists can then take east-west streets to easily reach destinations in Tenleytown, Cleveland Park, Cathedral Heights, etc.

Yes, the bike lanes on Connecticut Avenue will be even more useful if/when there are also more/better bike lanes on the roads that connect to Connecticut Avenue.

[Anonymous]

Connecticut Avenue is going to density a lot. If DC is to attract a greater number of young creatives to make the area more vibrant, then bike lanes are essential. This part of the evolution of the urban environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Avenue is going to density a lot. If DC is to attract a greater number of young creatives to make the area more vibrant, then bike lanes are essential. This part of the evolution of the urban environment.

No they aren't. Who fed you that claptrap? All that "young creatives" want are other "young creatives" and night life. Upper NW is never going to be an enclave of young creatives, that's what downtown is for. Upper NW is where people go when fhey become parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connecticut Avenue is going to density a lot. If DC is to attract a greater number of young creatives to make the area more vibrant, then bike lanes are essential. This part of the evolution of the urban environment.

No they aren't. Who fed you that claptrap? All that "young creatives" want are other "young creatives" and night life. Upper NW is never going to be an enclave of young creatives, that's what downtown is for. Upper NW is where people go when fhey become parents.

Parents use bikes. Kids use bikes.

[Anonymous]

I saw 4 bicyclists on my evening commute along CT Ave between DuPont Circle and the MoCo border: 2 northbound, 2 southbound…all 4 pedaling slowly on the sidewalk. These people didn’t look like they wanted to speed along the street.

I also saw a young woman carrying a huge Chucky doll, but that’s a different issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw 4 bicyclists on my evening commute along CT Ave between DuPont Circle and the MoCo border: 2 northbound, 2 southbound…all 4 pedaling slowly on the sidewalk. These people didn’t look like they wanted to speed along the street.

I also saw a young woman carrying a huge Chucky doll, but that’s a different issue.

Taking your count as accurate, the fact that they were riding on the sidewalk is exactly why people support the bike lanes. Bikes don’t belong on the sidewalk, but that street is daunting to bike on in traffic. (I routinely ride on it for more than a mile each way when I commute by bike, and it’s not relaxing.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading the comments on the upzoning post here as well as on my neighborhood email list about the changes that have been approved for Connecticut Avenue, I'm frustrated that I wasn't aware that the city was considering such significant changes. Now that I know about it, I'm wondering if there is a chance the decision could be reversed or greatly modified? For those of us who are just now realizing what's planned and are very concerned about how the changes will affect daily life for nearby residents and for commuters trying to get downtown or to schools, what's the best way to ask to have the decision reconsidered? Straight to the Mayor? To City Council reps? Who are the decisionmakers that need to be reached? I'm not looking to debate the issue here. If the neighborhood email discussion is any model, it won't be productive. Instead I'm asking for direction on who you should talk to if you oppose the plan and whether it's too late to make any difference. Please no comments about how I should have known about it sooner. Over the past two years I've been keeping a small business going while trying to manage two kids under 6 during COVID and caring for a terminally ill parent. While I wish I could have been following local issues more closely, I couldn't until now.

Bike lanes are for single people with no kids -anyone with kids is not commuting on a bike

You clearly do not see the people riding with kids in cargo bikes, or people riding on a bike with their kid on a bike in tow. This happens a lot. Particularly in the areas around Eaton, Murch, Janney and Lafayette, at least that I see first hand.

Like on the side streets and in the neighborhoods? The places where you are purposefully trying to increase traffic?

It's interesting how nobody seems to want more cars on "side streets and in the neighborhoods." But more bikes would be fine there, I guess? It's almost like cars have lots of bad effects on the public (for example, noise, air pollution, danger) that bikes don't have.

Cars are dangerous for pedestrians, residents and bicyclists. Cars, should be kept on major thoroughfares going into and out of the city. You want more bicycle and pedestrians to be on the side streets where residents can be impacted by traffic, congestion and pollution. So you want to keep the traffic, congestion and pollution in a channel going in and out rather than a delta that spreads out from the main thoroughfare. It is much safer for everyone to have cars in limited pathways and have the pedestrians and bicycles on the side streets.

Bicycles traveling on the main thoroughfare is a convenience for the bicyclists, but is not good for safety or traffic flow.

Bikes on thoroughfares because that is where the businesses we are supporting are located. WTF.

I like bike lanes. But Virginia wouldn't take away a couple of lanes of I-66 to build bike lanes, just as Maryland wouldn't narrow I-270 to build them. Fortunately, NW DC is not bisected by the busy interstate highways that were proposed in the Fifties and Sixties. However, major arterial roads like Connecticut Avenue serve as those through routes to downtown. The logic of constraining them to build bike lanes is nutty, as that will just squeeze traffic on to neighborhood streets that are not designed to handle it. It would be better to paint bike lanes on the quieter streets where bike riders would be safer and residents would not have to deal with diversion of significant numbers of vehicles pushed off Connecticut.

Most of the neighborhood streets don’t even cut through all the way north/south. Drivers are going to turn onto the side streets, deal with 20 mph speed limits, frequent stop signs, occasional speed bumps, etc., just to have to get back on Connecticut or Reno again and then cut back into the neighborhood? There’s no way that’ll actually be faster for them than staying on the main road would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After reading the comments on the upzoning post here as well as on my neighborhood email list about the changes that have been approved for Connecticut Avenue, I'm frustrated that I wasn't aware that the city was considering such significant changes. Now that I know about it, I'm wondering if there is a chance the decision could be reversed or greatly modified? For those of us who are just now realizing what's planned and are very concerned about how the changes will affect daily life for nearby residents and for commuters trying to get downtown or to schools, what's the best way to ask to have the decision reconsidered? Straight to the Mayor? To City Council reps? Who are the decisionmakers that need to be reached? I'm not looking to debate the issue here. If the neighborhood email discussion is any model, it won't be productive. Instead I'm asking for direction on who you should talk to if you oppose the plan and whether it's too late to make any difference. Please no comments about how I should have known about it sooner. Over the past two years I've been keeping a small business going while trying to manage two kids under 6 during COVID and caring for a terminally ill parent. While I wish I could have been following local issues more closely, I couldn't until now.

Bike lanes are for single people with no kids -anyone with kids is not commuting on a bike

You clearly do not see the people riding with kids in cargo bikes, or people riding on a bike with their kid on a bike in tow. This happens a lot. Particularly in the areas around Eaton, Murch, Janney and Lafayette, at least that I see first hand.

Like on the side streets and in the neighborhoods? The places where you are purposefully trying to increase traffic?

It's interesting how nobody seems to want more cars on "side streets and in the neighborhoods." But more bikes would be fine there, I guess? It's almost like cars have lots of bad effects on the public (for example, noise, air pollution, danger) that bikes don't have.

Cars are dangerous for pedestrians, residents and bicyclists. Cars, should be kept on major thoroughfares going into and out of the city. You want more bicycle and pedestrians to be on the side streets where residents can be impacted by traffic, congestion and pollution. So you want to keep the traffic, congestion and pollution in a channel going in and out rather than a delta that spreads out from the main thoroughfare. It is much safer for everyone to have cars in limited pathways and have the pedestrians and bicycles on the side streets.

Bicycles traveling on the main thoroughfare is a convenience for the bicyclists, but is not good for safety or traffic flow.

Bikes on thoroughfares because that is where the businesses we are supporting are located. WTF.

I like bike lanes. But Virginia wouldn't take away a couple of lanes of I-66 to build bike lanes, just as Maryland wouldn't narrow I-270 to build them. Fortunately, NW DC is not bisected by the busy interstate highways that were proposed in the Fifties and Sixties. However, major arterial roads like Connecticut Avenue serve as those through routes to downtown. The logic of constraining them to build bike lanes is nutty, as that will just squeeze traffic on to neighborhood streets that are not designed to handle it. It would be better to paint bike lanes on the quieter streets where bike riders would be safer and residents would not have to deal with diversion of significant numbers of vehicles pushed off Connecticut.

Most of the neighborhood streets don’t even cut through all the way north/south. Drivers are going to turn onto the side streets, deal with 20 mph speed limits, frequent stop signs, occasional speed bumps, etc., just to have to get back on Connecticut or Reno again and then cut back into the neighborhood? There’s no way that’ll actually be faster for them than staying on the main road would be.

Well then they can stay on CT ave and curse their self imposed gridlock

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw 4 bicyclists on my evening commute along CT Ave between DuPont Circle and the MoCo border: 2 northbound, 2 southbound…all 4 pedaling slowly on the sidewalk. These people didn’t look like they wanted to speed along the street.

I also saw a young woman carrying a huge Chucky doll, but that’s a different issue.

Taking your count as accurate, the fact that they were riding on the sidewalk is exactly why people support the bike lanes. Bikes don’t belong on the sidewalk, but that street is daunting to bike on in traffic. (I routinely ride on it for more than a mile each way when I commute by bike, and it’s not relaxing.)

I disagree.

They don’t look like long-haul commuters. All 4 were using bike-share bikes.

Plus, there were 4. Why on earth would we invest in bike lanes and risk creating traffic for what must be a very small group of people?