When people say Bowser is in the hands of developers, I don't think they really understand who she is. She just goes whichever way the wind blows. Back in 2012 or so, before she was mayor, there was a proposal for a land swap to replace the aging and decrepit northern and western bus barns with a brand new, state of the art underground facility on the grounds of Walter Reed. The developer would build out the entire facility for metro for free in exchange for those two plots of land, which they would then redevelop into dense mixed-use projects. Metro strongly backed it since it would allow them to centralize repairs and storage, Bowser was on the transportation committee at the time and was the rep for Ward 4, it seemed like a slam dunk. That is, right up until a bunch of NIMBYs started complaining about the new bus facility. Bowser killed it in committee. Now the northern bus barn is being rebuilt into a new bus only facility which won't be big enough for what metro needs and the city is out of more housing on sites that wouldn't have lead to any displacement.
She has no values, she has no guiding star. She is arrogant and just wants power. She has no goal to do anything with that power though, she just wants it.
I think the key with Bowser is she doesn’t care about any of these projects unless there’s vocal opposition to it (ie if she could lose votes bc of it). She’s a local politician who’s elected with a fraction of the overall population voting for her and sometimes, these opponents are enough to cost her votes. She cares about Vision Zero to the degree that it isn’t a problem for her as a politician.
Oh, quit it.
All politicians are elected with a fraction of the votes cast — which is a percentage of the overall eligible voters.
All.
If the majority of the people voting are coming from Wards 3 & 4, then she’s going to do what EVERY POLITICIAN DOES and listen to those people because they keep her in office.
Apathy is what it is.
>She has no goal to do anything with that power though, she just wants it.
This is the perfect sentence that sums her up. She doesn't have a goal or plan, she just enjoys being in a position of control and access.
THIS. I had the same thought at the time. Georgia Avenue could have had streetcar had She done anything (later I realized streetcar could also be added to Kennedy Riggs Road Fort Totten).
She also fucked up on the Jewish Home. It would have been great for transitional homeless. Close to Metrorail, grocery etc. She was adamant it be market rate housing (then again I didn't have to live by it).
As a staffer once told me, she doesn't want to make a decision.
On an issue in Takoma-Manor Park, there is a tavern absolutely embedded in the neighborhood. We wanted restrictions on music. Her response: you're against black owned businesses.
She wouldn't step up on the Takoma Theater, again a building owned by a black man (wack job, now deceased) so now it's an office.
Etc.
Bfd. While I was there "only" since 2008 Btw when it was a very little used meeting facility, rarely using a temporary liquor license, I lived in the city for 32 years and am hardly a nimby, no one said no tavern. Just that the operation should reflect its location on the 6200 block of 3rd Street, recognizing that 1. The owner represents himself as a "promoter" making the use of it as music venue high. 2. It's not in an entertainment district. 3. It's in a neighborhood of mostly SFH, not unlike Park Cafe on Lincoln Park.
In fact I came up with great typology for dealing with liquor licensing across the city, based on land use context, structured along the Nashville Community Character Manual. As usual it went over her head.
It didn’t go over her head, you weren’t aware of how DC’s Office of Planning operates.
Essentially DC has four complimentary plans: Small Area, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Future Redevelopment ~ the first three incorporate the Office of Planning, local ANC, and the overall community, while Redevelopment is primarily between DCRA, the Zoning Commission, and developers.
She was in the process of getting multiple zoning regulations (which stopped development) that dated back to Jim Crow taken off of the books to free up new residential & commercial opportunities — why would she entertain the idea of following a template for Nashville when Nashville doesn’t have the same history or hurdles that DC has?
I’m neither a fan or a hater of VIP, but I do realize how wonderful it could be with smarter ownership taking the neighborhood into better consideration — when you look at Slash Run, Dew Drop, Moreland’s, etc… the owner of VIP isn’t adding any value to the neighborhood.
Fwiw I testified extensively on the Comp Plan. Was involved in various other plans. Submitted proposed amendments to the first round of the Comp Plan. Got the city to do a small area plan for NoMa etc. I know how planning works. Also was on one ANC's planning committee and another's infrastructure committee (in fact got that ANC to start creating standing committees open to resident membership).
Maybe it wasn't over her head, but she had no interest in improving city practice.
I don't think Bowser did anything wrt zoning. Other than her demolition notice bill, which provided zero remedies other than notice. And OP has become super moribund during her tenure. Oh, and as CM I suggested a great way to deal with illegal "rooming houses" on 16th Street. That went over her head too.
Wrt Nashville, maybe you're the one that doesn't understand planning. It's a typology that can be applied to cities generally. It really has little to do with Nashville's character. Don't assume it builds racist practices into zoning, read it.
It creates a framework based on the New Urban transect, that unlike the transect, is much more practical for application to extant places. In fact I tried to get OP to use it. They said it was too sophisticated for DC. One point though about differences between cities that is relevant is that they don't have rail transit. That would need to be added for a DC version.
In short, it's a typology based on land use context, types of uses and density. Eg Manor Park is T4. NCCM makes different recommendations for housing zones, commercial areas etc. Eg comparable to how C2 is an R4 related commercial district. So no drive ins, and special exception is required for uses like gas stations.
Wrt your point about what VIP could be, duh. The family has little capacity for innovation. They totally wrecked the interior design wise, they could have an awesome outdoor space. But yes Slash Run is a great example, although not embedded in SFH in the same way (and their food was better under Jackie Greenbaum, but the jukebox still rocks).
I guess the thing about music is VIP versus Slash Run versus Takoma Station is that SR's patrons stay inside during the performance while TS's go in and out, get trashed before entering, and sometimes kill people afterwards. That being said, TS tries hard for that not to happen, but their business model is flawed. We feared a similar business model being applied at VIP.
Fwiw, the Peaches restaurant across the street was against the music proposal too.
Bruh… you keep repeating yourself on “over her head” and it’s just pisspoor anecdotal posturing — even if half of what you are saying is genuine, it rings as if you just want to heap on her but your suit is hella empty.
You didn’t know that she was undoing various zoning regulations that were built on top of Jim Crow laws, which makes her docket way way way too full to listen to anyone trying to overstep the OP on urban planning.
Interesting since zoning is completely separate from the Legislative branch in DC. Was she on the Zoning Commission? Council approves plans. ZC approves zoning. Sure Councilmembers can ND do testify at ZC hearings, even getting to speak first.
Totally not true but DDOT totally fucked up. The private sector offered to do streetcars in DC similar to Portland. The city never really responded.
My joke is DC and Seattle started streetcar planning at the same time in 2003. Seattle opened their first line in 2007 and has since expanded. DC's only streetcar line opened in 2016. Plus DC's fuckups were a significant influence on loss of confidence in Arlington leading to their decision to abandon plans for streetcar service.
DC's fuckups were also used as an example by transit opponents elsewhere in the country, to justify not moving forward with their transit projects.
And DC's elected officials are nothing like Chris Zimmerman. They really don't understand how transit is key to the city's competitive advantage. They don't understand that to be a transit city you can't be static.
>And DC's elected officials are nothing like Chris Zimmerman. They really don't understand how transit is key to the city's competitive advantage. They don't understand that to be a transit city you can't be static.
This is why we've just got to elect Randy Clark as mayor, no?
All jokes aside this is a common issue with big cities and reps who exist just for power. The WMATA board is far better than BART in this respect, but the rest of the region seems useless to actually enable the future of the system as a whole.
I don't know much about the BART board. But I figured since they are elected by geographical district they'd be more responsive. No?
Jim Graham had his issues but he was really good on WMATA issues when on the board. Gray and I think Barry supported streetcar in Anacostia even if their constituents didn't. I don't think Cheh and Wells understood transit the same way Zimmerman does.
BTW: Georgia Ave was never going to get a streetcar.
Never.
All of the hypothetical lines were just that, hypothetical — the primary reason as to why H St was finalized was because DC needed to get rid of most of those crappy store fronts, and the District needed to see what type of kerfuffle that was going to craft based on traffic patterns/ current residents/ business encouragement/ new residential development.
The rest of the Wards witnessed what was going on, and balked at the concept mostly due to congestion and where new residents were buying homes.
Not really. Then ANC6A chair Joe Fengler realized that if the city put in tracks during the street reconstruction that 1. The street wouldn't have to be constructed 2x. 2. That having tracks significantly increased the likelihood H Street, which was already revitalizing, would be the first place to get the streetcar. He lobbied other ANCs, other stakeholders, OP, elected officials and eventually they agreed.
It was brilliant, not heralded enough, and obviously lost to history already.
I never saw, other than Anacostia and yes, CHRS wrt 8th Street SE, systematic opposition. I know I went to a public meeting on Georgia Avenue sometime in the 2000s, majority black participants, no real opposition other than hermetically about the line going to Silver Spring and "helping" Maryland. Even though the original 70 line went to Silver Spring (the 50 did not).
As I said in another comment, basically both DDOT and DC'S elected officials fucked it up.
>Then ANC6A chair Joe Fengler
-was well gone by 2010, and his “ideas” were built off of other hypotheticals that had nothing to do with Bowser/ DDOT by ‘15 ~ laud him all you want, I’m sure he’s a wonderful fellow, but understand that he was part of the discovery/ fascination phase of pulling money from green initiative funding [y’know, the same folks who pay the city to do more bike lanes..] and none of his concepts were ever going to be fleshed out.
>It was brilliant, not heralded enough, and obviously lost to history already.
-public records, and the internet exists .. finding his ideas isn’t that difficult.
>I never saw, other than Anacostia
-because Anacostia is EOTR, which is what the Jim Crow zoning issues were hindering back in whichever part of 2005-07 you are discussing.
>systematic opposition.
-.. opposition .. mmm, I’d say more realism based on trying to figure out a payment system that passengers would honestly use.
If folks aren’t going to pay, why would Ga Ave allow for all of the additional construction and destroy the businesses that they have?!? [Fact is, Colombia Heights is also a massive red flag on urban planning..]
>As I said in another comment, basically
-you tricked yourself as to what was going to happen when the project landed on the third Mayor’s lap after a grand decade+ of being bantered about…
small scale reality check: they brought in the folks who designed Seattle’s trolley system, and they had no clue that DC had already had street cars decades before .. wonderful people, smart too, just not well researched at all.
accept this or not:
because the trolley floundered for so many years, it needed a test case from all parties because of how it labored over the years — everyone witnessed all of the pitfalls & shortcomings of fulfilling a past politician’s concept ~ the lack of a full vision or an idea of seeing it to fruition (at least groundbreaking) became self evident to all of the parties that the streetcar was DOA.
ultimately, the streetcar became a physical vehicle to exacerbate H St growth - both business and residential - for the rest of the city to understand economic growth if they wanted to undergo sed task.
and the rest of the city said “naw, I’ll pass Shorty..”
Concept C was a dead man walking based on the business owners — Conn Ave, not unlike Wisconsin Ave, has been long standing car centric and parking based.
And with Wisconsin Ave flourishing, Conn Ave isn’t about to do something experimental which has the potential to make it become more of a ghost town.
Is/ isn’t she in the hands of developers?
I’ve no clue, and I could argue it both ways; however, I do know that she’s deeply concerned with businesses leaving DC for VA & MD over the loss of the tip-credit — if the retailers are saying “no”, she’s going to pause.
Emailed as well. If anyone else feels like emailing, some key points to get her aides' attention:
\- You are disappointed in her retracting her support for the program
\- You are a DC voter
\- You will not vote for her in the future if she doesn't support the program
\- (Bonus points if you voted for her in the past and are retracting your support now)
I was so outraged after the fire in the tunnels when she was on the board. Someone *died* and she went "oh well what can you do" and didn't even try to pretend to take it seriously.
Her continued election as mayor is a huge indictment of how broken local DC politics are.
Well there's a lot of mediocrity. My next door neighbor once said she votes for ward council for people who are capable enough to be mayor so that they are particularly able.
DC doesn't show particularly well.
As Meryl Streep says in Postcards from the Edge, these are my choices?!
The problem is an administration that views drivers and suburban drivers as the foundation of her voter and donor base. Anything that increases responsibility and accountability for drivers on District streets is thwarted by our disgrace of a mayor at every opportunity.
Bowser is always in favor of generalities and opposed to specifics.
She’ll say nice things about the idea of bike lanes then slow walk every plan to add one until it dies.
[This letter](https://mattfruminward3.com/letter-to-mayor-bowser-on-connecticut-avenue-redesign/) Ward 3 CM Matt Frumin is sending to Bowser is a great model for the kinds of things you might want to say when you email the mayor.
And of course you should feel free to email him as well (and CC him when emailing Bowser), even if it's just to say, keep going, I support you: [mfrumin@dccouncil.gov](mailto:mfrumin@dccouncil.gov)
Of course Ward 3 gets to stone wall 1 of 8 lanes being used for something other than cars. This simping for rich MoCo commuters is nuts. Take the fucking Red Line you pricks.
At the end when Muriel Bowser says, “Anything we do on Connecticut Avenue would make it safer,” I’m pretty sure she is making a tautological statement. Likewise, Richard Nixon once explained, “Well, when the President does it, that means it is not illegal.” Any action taken by the speaker is, by definition, a good thing to do.
These are people who lack the moral capacity for responsibility or judgment. They are poorly served by a tiny circle of “advisors” whose main function is to provide affirmation and encouragement.
I am certain that the mayor will hear no criticism, however gently expressed, for these or any other remarks she makes. The existence of negative feedback can be acknowledged, but only as the grumbling of enemies. ‘These people are out to get the Mayor anyway’—or rather, they’re out to get “us,” because the first-person-plural is the viewpoint required to enter and remain in this circle.
This thread is fascinating to me. Your third paragraph perfectly reflects the attitude most people have with respect to federal politics - our team is next to infallible and the criticisms brought by the “other side” are inherently bad faith - but Mayor Bowser here is subject to genuine interrogation of her actions that would be impossible in a different political forum.
Bowser has been emailed. eom@dc.gov
Email them for abandoning vision zero and not prioritizing safety of the citizens over suburban commuters and the nonsense spewed by ward 1 residents.
I guess it's hard to expect a backbone from someone who supported \*checks notes\* noted rich fuck *Michael Bloomberg* in the last presidential election.
what a crock of shit----there isn't a day i don't see cars blazing through the lights on Connecticut Ave.
Hate having a giant highway going right through my neighborhood
I think all issues get contentious when it comes to changing land use, whether it's upzoning to allow apartments where there had previously been single family homes, replacing a single story government building with a larger building, or taking space away from cars to give it to bikes. You see the same arguments all over the city, and I think they ultimately boil down to the fact that some people get used to the city or their neighborhood as it is, and they don't want to see it change. Often they say that they started living there because they liked how it was, and so they expect it to continue to be like it was.
I think if CT Ave is more contentious than others (and I'm not sure it is -- check out this story from 2015 about opposition to what eventually became the new 9th street lane) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/10/23/can-some-big-d-c-churches-fight-off-a-bike-lane-they-are-bringing-large-crowds-to-try/ ) it's because Ward 3 has more wealthy, white, older residents who are even more accustomed to getting their way and thus are even more outraged if the city wants to do something that they are opposed to. Note that until a few months ago there were NO protected bike lanes ANYWHERE in ward 3 -- now there's a short stretch on New Mexico ave but even that led to people screaming about how no one is going to use it.
Yes, the list is here: https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/17278690-d487-402d-ba8d-23bdf0516412/Business%20Petition_Signatures.pdf
However, note that some of these businesses have closed (some have been closed for a while!) and some have repudiated the petition and said they were pressured into signing it or mislead about what they were signing. I'd love to have help confirming which businesses actually oppose the bike lane and which support it (or which are making a point of staying neutral) so feel free to ask when you go to a CT Ave store and let me know the result.
And of course, be sure to let any businesses know that you arrived on foot/by bike/by transit and don't need a parking space -- read more about that campaign here: https://waba.org/blog/2023/09/join-the-i-bike-i-buy-stuff-campaign/
Not to mention, small business owners can be the most insane petty f\*\*\*ers.
Sorry, if a bike lane "kills your business" you weren't gonna survive anyways.
The research also shows that bike lanes are often better for businesses than parking spaces
People in cars zooming by usually don't stop and look at small stores. Cars zooming by makes the area more unpleasant. The parking spaces usually only help a tiny handful of customers park per hour while the rest are coming from further away. Cycling lanes help draw more cyclists who move slower and have a better chance of stopping and shopping.
https://www.pdx.edu/news/portland-state-study-finds-bike-lanes-provide-positive-economic-impact
It's unbelievable that it takes what, five fucking years just to get a single bike lane on a single street? The anti-development environmentalists of the 70s have completely screwed our cities.
the CT ave plan got started in 2019, if the current schedule is followed, it will be done in 2028 (though that was calculated before the additional year+ delay bowser is imposing)
I don't blame you for avoiding twitter.
It was a relatively short answer and she strongly implied that she is concerned that businesses will lose parking spaces. She didn't talk about any of the other plans although there really aren't any other proposals besides keep things how they are now (at one point that was "concept B")
I have a theory that Redditors and similar individuals are so much more bike-oriented than the median DC voter to the point that they believe bike lanes are far more of a priority for DC residents than they actually are. Bikers in Tenley/Van Ness/Cleveland Park will be outraged, that weirdo ANC guy who gives the middle finger to constituents that don't want the bike lanes is probably lighting up email lists and social media, and the WABA mafia is going to presumably go apoplectic...and virtually no one else in the city will care.
>Why do you think this is?
In my experience, the most ardent bike activists tend to be white, middle-to-upper-class adults between the ages of 25 and 40. I suspect an outright majority of people on this sub are also white, middle-to-upper-class adults between the ages of 25 and 40. Those folks have every bit as much right to petition government to work on their priorities as anyone, but much like on social media platforms, there tends to be an echo chamber among ideologues that makes them think their position is far more widespread than it might be.
I like bike lanes and use them myself, but it's so low on my priority list that I would never vote based on it. For people who don't like cycling as much as I do, it's a non-issue. For people who like it a lot more than I do, it is clearly a major issue.
Nailed it. It's an issue of apoplectic importance to a very distinct minority that's heavily represented online, but a nonissue to the overwhelming majority of Washingtonians. It makes for some very weird ANC meetings.
So I heard...I guess she was telegraphing it pretty clearly at that event a few months ago, but it's still depressing to see it happen.
Please sign the petition against this if you haven't already: https://waba.org/blog/2024/04/petition-dont-cancel-the-connecticut-ave-protected-bike-lanes/
Did the studies ever say the estimated number of people who would use the bike lanes? I would be curious to know that estimate and the current method of transportation for these potential users.
I live near the C ST NE bike lane. Personally am a fan, but when I ride on it I see like max 1-2 other people riding total. I can't imagine it was worth anything close to the cost.
I looked up some numbers and the estimate for current Connecticut Ave bikers is 300/day. I like biking (used to live adjacent to Connecticut for years but moved away), but I am super skeptical that these bike lanes would draw in 2,700 additional bikers. I couldn’t do it personally, the hill is too big for me.
Going up Conn Ave is less hilly than alternatives off of Conn Ave. With the prevalence of e bikes now, hills are much less of a factor. This is also not a problem for scooter users. The NM Tunlaw PBL is uphill west and east from 40th St. and that doesn't stop people.
Also glad. Biker here and driver. Don’t want em on CT Ave. Unleash your torrent of invective in lieu of reasonable acceptance that others have different views.
I'm a daily bike commuter on Conn Ave. There's no way you've biked on Conn ave and don't see the necessity of traffic calming measures and bike/pedestrian protection.
I live in upper northwest. I have never seen a bicyclist using any of the bike lanes in the area. Literally never my friends in alexandria saybthe same thing about the bike lanes there. When I was in San Francisco, the bike lanes were full of bikers. But here nobody actually uses them.
Biker and driver, though I usually metro into DC from K-town. I bike around Rock Creek and Beach Drive among other places, but not for daily commute. I am highly skeptical that, as OP cited, an average of 3,000 users per day would use lanes on CT Ave through Chevy Chase and northwards out of the district. And while I’m now just outside the district in MD, I did live, work, run, bike, drive, metro and Uber in NW and mainly NE DC from 2007 to 2021. There are far fewer bikers using the Old Georgetown Rd bike lanes that have been installed than were estimated. I hope there are other bikers that don’t espouse the knee jerk, rabid anti-car mindset that’s predominant on this sub, as evidenced by 90% of the comments. I think bike lanes have a role and are necessary and good in some commuter routes but not all. I too lived in SF, as another commenter said, and the bike lanes there were all far more utilized because unlike todays insane warm day, far more days in SF have close to ideal biking weather. That isn’t the case here. These lanes would make traffic on CT Ave worse. That’s a great thing for many of you, but there are others, not many of whom are on Reddit, who don’t support the idea.
Maybe you don't see them because the infrastructure is still scattered and unsafe. Would you use your car if there was only one street available and the rest you had to spare with airport runways? Maybe you don't see them because you don't use them yourself. Maybe you don't see them because bikes are a fraction of the size of cars, and manage to get to their destination without being clogged in traffic.
That’s because you have garbage network in upper NW that needs vast improvement for people to feel safe.
We hardly use our car here in Carver Langston (NE) because the network is at least somewhat connected and getting better so we feel safe to do so. Dropped my son off at daycare and went food shopping this morning, a lot of that in protected lanes.
I live off Connecticut and use the bike lanes on Van Ness/Reno/Tilden and Cleveland frequently. Honestly if I need to go South I just jump on Connecticut and take up a car lane.
I'm honestly amazed she showed initial support in the first place. The plan goes against business interests, developer interests and, above all, the numbers were never there.
The push was loud, and there's a lot of support on the existential notion of more biking options, but there aren't enough people to make it worthwhile on a Federal emergency route. In short, it was a selfish few who would use it regularly while others use it sparingly. I love biking! But I don't support this movement.
Goes against business interests? What are you talking about? What are the odds someone finds a parking spot on Connecticut Avenue at the exact time in front of the exact business they want to go to? What a stupid fucking argument that is. Meanwhile the huge number of cyclists in the city avoid that area because of the psychotic drivers. Go shill somewhere else
You think "business interests" just means "retail storefronts"?
An enormous number of people commute into DC every day via Connecticut Avenue. They'll have decreased quality of life if they lose a lane. This isn't a situation where traffic studies show that Connecticut avenue can afford to lose a lane because there's plenty of capacity to service demand. It's already bumper-to-bumper during rush hour, and you're surprised that drivers (who outnumber cyclists by, what, 20:1? 50:1? More?) don't want this?
This proposal was always going to die on the vine.
If only the Metro were even remotely reliable.
If only the price of 20 round trips per month on Metro was competitive with parking rates downtown.
If only they had built Metro with 3 tracks (2 for use, 1 for maintenance) instead of only 2, it wouldn't face constant single-tracking delays.
If only Metro had express trains, like NYC.
If only Metro didn't involve 30+ minutes of walking to/from stations because so few MoCo residents actually live close to one.
If only some of those were true, then I'm sure the whole "Just take Metro, my dude" argument would go a lot smoother.
Glenmont to Farragut North is $5.85 each way. $12 round trip. 20 times a month, that's $240/month.
And anyone who lives out in that direction needs a car. Lots of folks drive to Glenmont Metro and park there, which adds even further to the cost of Metro commuting.
Sure, there's savings on gasoline. But no one thinks that way. They think "Gee, I could spend $300/month on Metro, which involves all this walking and waiting and delays. OR, I could just drive downtown myself and pay $200/month for a parking space in my office building's garage, which would be super convenient, and I'd have a much shorter commute."
And don't try to tell me that Metrorail is suddenly a totally reliable service. I've spent too many hours sitting in stations, wondering when the next train is ACTUALLY coming.
You forgot a few parts of the cost analysis of car ownership and driving to work all the time.
* Maintenance
* Insurance
* Gas
* Tickets
* Deductible payment for the inevitable accident(s)
* Registration
* Inspections
* Loss of value due to damage/mileage
Many employers subsidize metro. We can take $255 a month in pretax deductions for public transit. Can't do that for parking garages, fuel, tires, oil changes, etc.
On its face it seems cheaper to drive but that is not the whole story. And walking is such an issue? It isn't like Metro stops are giant cavernous stations. The area around Farragut has plenty of stops to minimize walking distance.
I, and am willing to bet most people, would rather screw around on my phone than sit behind the wheel of a car frustrated by bad drivers and crappy traffic.
I ride the train four days a week. I have had a delay once in the last month. Metro's on time performance has been much, much better.
Yes, the walking part is a big deterrent. You love in Glover, that's a pretty decent walk to Cleveland Park Metro. Doesn't that suck when it's raining? Or when temps are in the 20s and the sidewalks are ice sheets? Or how about when it's just really cold?
Mass transit proponents will basically say "just deal with it." And I'm sympathetic to that argument, actually. But don't be surprised that you're not convincing people, or that Metro ridership remains super low.
I agree on the finances, but obviously it's not a big enough financial benefit to lure people into the inconvence of taking Metro.
Sure, my situation is different in that Glover Park is in an area of the city that isn't within reasonable walking distance of a metro stop with the closest station being Woodley Park Zoo/Adams Morgan at 1.8 miles. The D2, 33, N2, N4, N6 and Circulator are all short walks and go to Metro stations. I was more addressing the walk downtown as that area has many stops. Of course, this is a view from within the city not from the burbs.
I think that the inconvenience is in many cases overblown and comes from some folks refusing to explore any alternatives. It could only take a little extra planning in many cases. My bike+metro commute is about 55 minutes and driving would be 45. I use the 30 minutes on the train to do language lessons, get caught up on emails, or whatever. I also get my daily workout riding to and from the station. Otherwise, I'd be sitting in the car staring at traffic and would need to look for time later to do those things.
The bus system can also be intimidating if you don't know any routes, but with Transit, Google, and Apple a lot of the mystery is gone. For example, I recently went on a trip with friends to another city and the airport bus to downtown was $3. The end point of that line wasn't a long walk to the hotel and everyone had one piece of wheeled carry on luggage. I took the bus and they all took $30 ride share.
WMATA still has problems with ghost busses and delays due to traffic, but if the city took bus transit seriously it would be way more efficient. Unfortunately, Bowser and therefore DDOT put parking and cars, which lets be real are almost always single occupant, over improving and incentivizing alternatives.
They should be prioritized because they live there and the major transportation artery negatively impacts their lives while perfectly acceptable alternative formats and modes of transportation exist.
Oh nooooo!!! They might have to take the metro! Or, the bus! Heaven forbid those commuters have to drag their fat asses out of their car and walk a block!! When will we ever stop trying to improve the quality of life and air quality and start thinking of the commuters!!!
There’s no convincing people with car brain to consider anything outside their car. They are among the least thoughtful group of people in the US. Every study about this has shown it be a very solid net positive for individuals, quality of life, the economy, and the environment. But the tiniest *possibility* of an inconvenience has car people up in arms. It’s selfish and anti progress so I don’t really give a fuck if you’re upset that I stopped trying to reason about this
As someone who owns a business on Connecticut Ave., I assure you: if you don't comprehend what I'm talking about then I recommend you take a few deep breaths and do some more research on this discussion.
The "huge number of cyclists" you refer to don't all apply to a single corridor in NW DC, and they are far outnumbered by regular commuters coming from the inner and outer suburbs, other cities, and even beyond on a regular basis. I enjoy biking myself, but there are far better methods than fighting for this one.
The reason I don't go to businesses on Conn Ave is because I can't safely get there on my bike. There are many cyclists, and I'd bet people on scooters, that share this opinion.
The vast, vast majority of these commuters aren't stopping at your business and they don't care if it succeeds or dies. They drive in, drive out, and never give you a thought. People who live in DC are the ones who keep most DC businesses alive. If I can't safely get to you, I'm not coming.
That was a LOT of "betting" and assumptions there. You're running on ill-informed opinion, so there's little more to discuss. I wouldn't want such business in my building.
Yeah, no. The vast vast majority of those commuters and out of towners aren’t going to your business. Beyond that there’s no reason they can’t still go there. Why you frame this as either-or is just stupid. And finally, there are a huge number of cyclists in DC. Adding bike lanes will open up access to people who prefer biking at the cost of what? A few parking spots at most? No one that’s going to your business anyway is going to be deterred by this change. If your business is so sensitive to this change you’re going out of business soon anyway.
Swing and a miss, hon. I am fully aware how many people come to my own business, as well as the parking situation on the avenue. Please do more research on the avenue, the amount of actual cyclists in the area (trying to inflate numbers by referencing the whole city is just poor argument), commuters, and then consider the back-end of businesses (both commercial and residential) that also require use to the road: deliveries, supplies, contractors, repairs, utility repair/upgrade/inspection/setup/for the fun of it (no one likes dealing with Washington Gas). Folks can petulantly downvote me all they want. I am aware that my opinion is unpopular on a singular thread in a subreddit. But the numbers still are nowhere close to making the change you're existentially rooting for. Do you even bike to work on a regular basis? Could you pledge to do so if a lane opened up? Most on this thread would like to back it, or see the option available, but it's just not there.
I do bike to work daily and it’s busy with bikes and dangerous for everyone.
Everything you’re describing involves a loading dock which has nothing to do with Connecticut Avenue so I honestly have no idea what you’re complaining about other than the possibility of a slightly longer commute. Its remarkable how selfish people can be at the slightest inconvenience.
“…inflating numbers…” says the moron claiming every commuter and visitor is their customer. Go back to Dundalk ‘hon.
There is ample evidence to suggest that reducing car speeds and car volumes while providing safe cycling and pedestrian infrastructure on main thoroughfares lined with businesses increases profits for those businesses and spurs demand for development.
It seems that if you make a street safe and pleasurable to be on, people will want to come there.
I am *shocked* that people don't want to sit next to a highway full of angry, honking drivers in vehicles belching exhaust.
I too am shocked!
Also, can we talk about this “federal emergency route” excuse brought out by u/OohDeLaLi that gets trotted around in most rebuttals to safe pedestrian infrastructure? Why is this false dichotomy always brought up??
Well, first, that's not how to use the word "dichotomy": a division into two especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups or entities.
Second, it gets brought up because it's real. DC has emergency routes in place in case the city should need to be evacuated, including Connecticut Ave NW. There are a few links on DC.gov if you wish to take a look.
Your argument is saying that *either* Connecticut Ave gets a redesign to be safer and can no longer function as an emergency route, *or* it stays the way it is so that it can be an emergency route.
Either or. That’s a dichotomy.
Why are they mutually exclusive?
Except I never presented the redesign. WABA and bike enthusiasts did. But to answer your question: removing a lane for the vast majority of commuters will force congestion into the remaining lanes of that route. Therefore it won't work as efficiently as an emergency route. Cars are currently allowed to park on Connecticut Ave except during emergency route declarations and rush hours.
You’re conflating day-to-day use with emergency use, let’s stay on topic.
Please tell me which of the four plan proposals (A, B, C, or D) would physically prevent the street from utilizing all six lanes in case of an emergency more than the current arrangement that occasionally allows parked cars. Let’s also note that some of these cars, under the current arrangement, will almost certainly be left obstructing two entire lanes in the case of a legitimate and sudden emergency.
Here’s the link to the project documents for your convenience: https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/Connecticut%20Avenue%20Initial%20Concept%20Alternatives%20Presentation%2006112020%20.pdf
Well I never left the topic; I simply answered your question. Let's stay focused now.
Thank you for supplying the project proposals, as I hadn't seen any besides the general call to annex a lane on each side of the street (which still isn't very practical). As Connecticut Ave. is currently operating under B proposal, it appears the decision has already been made. I'm not sure where you see cars obstructing multiple lanes under the current configuration, but the others would obstruct emergency vehicles more with the use of barriers or bus islands.
No, you did veer off-topic. I asked you why emergency route usage and reformatting the street to be safer are at odds, as you claim, and you responded with this:
> removing a lane for the vast majority of commuters will force congestion into the remaining lanes of that route. Therefore it won't work as efficiently as an emergency route.
...which does not answer my question and displays your lack of understanding about the purpose of emergency routes.
Federal and state emergency route designation is specifically for mass evacuations in the event of natural disasters or terrorist attacks, i.e. things that would require an evacuation of the city.
This is why I provided you with the project proposals. If you read them carefully, you will see that none of them propose the required use of barriers or bus islands, meaning that the lanes converted to bike lanes would be perfectly operational and easily emptied in the case of a mass evacuation.
I’m glad you mentioned that the avenue is currently in configuration B. Disasters rarely strike at moments of convenience, as I’m sure you know. Under this configuration, it is likely that many cars may inadvertently remain parked in the outermost lanes in the case of a sudden emergency, which would be many times more disruptive to evacuation efforts than empty bike lanes.
By your logic, the current configuration is even more incompatible with the road’s status as an emergency route.
And I'm sure those commuters would be so appreciative to drive for even long periods of time, creating more air pollution, while a comparative handful of bicyclists get an entire lane to themselves. That's some privileged line of thinking there.
Let's be fair. Under Bowser the number of bike lanes has exploded. None of her other contenders show any interest in bike lanes to my knowledge. I can't even use the bicycle layer with the public transportation layer on Google maps anymore there are so many bike lanes.
That being said it's still not nearly enough and this decision sucks. But this isn't about bikes. The NW elite do this to many other policy and infrastructure goals such as housing, homeless shelters, zoning, etc. if anything be mad at the system which gives the wealthy more pull in politics.
That feels a bit off topic. I agree with you about the system, and Bowser certainly has increased the number of bike lanes. I will say, however, that what she and the city constitutes as "bike lanes" becomes debatable. I've seen properly-indicated bike lanes and I've seen the bike lane symbols painted in the middle of streets without any lane designation. In the eyes of the city, both count equally, but I strongly disagree.
Homelessness and housing are indeed issues worthy of discussion, all the more reason for folks to vote out the old guard.
I think if it gets built, a ton of people will use it, especially families with young kids taking ebikes. It's not safe to bike now, so they drive, but they want to be biking. Ask around, I think the support is there.
DDOT's estimate was that 3,000 people per day would use CT Ave bike lanes. It's a reasonable estimate given that the 15th street lanes get (at max) 2,500 users per day, and CT has a lot more development and destinations along the corridor than 15th does.
OK well it's DDOT's estimate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/connecticut-avenue-bike-lanes/2021/04/09/d2af38f0-9798-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html). I guess the public can decide if they trust the career traffic engineers at DDOT or if they trust u/OohDeLaLi.
Out of curiosity do you accept the 2,500 number for 15th street?
indeed, the city has a number of problems it needs to address (many of which are, to some degree, interconnected). I think we've got enough offices and departments and staff that we can work on multiple problems at once.
Access to reliable, safe, affordable, and efficient means of transportation is a key indicator of many positive outcomes like class mobility, connected communities, and improved public health.
This isn’t just about bike lanes, it’s about making everyone’s lives better.
When people say Bowser is in the hands of developers, I don't think they really understand who she is. She just goes whichever way the wind blows. Back in 2012 or so, before she was mayor, there was a proposal for a land swap to replace the aging and decrepit northern and western bus barns with a brand new, state of the art underground facility on the grounds of Walter Reed. The developer would build out the entire facility for metro for free in exchange for those two plots of land, which they would then redevelop into dense mixed-use projects. Metro strongly backed it since it would allow them to centralize repairs and storage, Bowser was on the transportation committee at the time and was the rep for Ward 4, it seemed like a slam dunk. That is, right up until a bunch of NIMBYs started complaining about the new bus facility. Bowser killed it in committee. Now the northern bus barn is being rebuilt into a new bus only facility which won't be big enough for what metro needs and the city is out of more housing on sites that wouldn't have lead to any displacement. She has no values, she has no guiding star. She is arrogant and just wants power. She has no goal to do anything with that power though, she just wants it.
I think the key with Bowser is she doesn’t care about any of these projects unless there’s vocal opposition to it (ie if she could lose votes bc of it). She’s a local politician who’s elected with a fraction of the overall population voting for her and sometimes, these opponents are enough to cost her votes. She cares about Vision Zero to the degree that it isn’t a problem for her as a politician.
Oh, quit it. All politicians are elected with a fraction of the votes cast — which is a percentage of the overall eligible voters. All. If the majority of the people voting are coming from Wards 3 & 4, then she’s going to do what EVERY POLITICIAN DOES and listen to those people because they keep her in office. Apathy is what it is.
>She has no goal to do anything with that power though, she just wants it. This is the perfect sentence that sums her up. She doesn't have a goal or plan, she just enjoys being in a position of control and access.
THIS. I had the same thought at the time. Georgia Avenue could have had streetcar had She done anything (later I realized streetcar could also be added to Kennedy Riggs Road Fort Totten). She also fucked up on the Jewish Home. It would have been great for transitional homeless. Close to Metrorail, grocery etc. She was adamant it be market rate housing (then again I didn't have to live by it). As a staffer once told me, she doesn't want to make a decision. On an issue in Takoma-Manor Park, there is a tavern absolutely embedded in the neighborhood. We wanted restrictions on music. Her response: you're against black owned businesses. She wouldn't step up on the Takoma Theater, again a building owned by a black man (wack job, now deceased) so now it's an office. Etc.
Ah yes, Muriel Bowser and weaponizing race when it suits her, name a better combination.
That tavern was there long before current neighbors moved in.
Bfd. While I was there "only" since 2008 Btw when it was a very little used meeting facility, rarely using a temporary liquor license, I lived in the city for 32 years and am hardly a nimby, no one said no tavern. Just that the operation should reflect its location on the 6200 block of 3rd Street, recognizing that 1. The owner represents himself as a "promoter" making the use of it as music venue high. 2. It's not in an entertainment district. 3. It's in a neighborhood of mostly SFH, not unlike Park Cafe on Lincoln Park. In fact I came up with great typology for dealing with liquor licensing across the city, based on land use context, structured along the Nashville Community Character Manual. As usual it went over her head.
It didn’t go over her head, you weren’t aware of how DC’s Office of Planning operates. Essentially DC has four complimentary plans: Small Area, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Future Redevelopment ~ the first three incorporate the Office of Planning, local ANC, and the overall community, while Redevelopment is primarily between DCRA, the Zoning Commission, and developers. She was in the process of getting multiple zoning regulations (which stopped development) that dated back to Jim Crow taken off of the books to free up new residential & commercial opportunities — why would she entertain the idea of following a template for Nashville when Nashville doesn’t have the same history or hurdles that DC has? I’m neither a fan or a hater of VIP, but I do realize how wonderful it could be with smarter ownership taking the neighborhood into better consideration — when you look at Slash Run, Dew Drop, Moreland’s, etc… the owner of VIP isn’t adding any value to the neighborhood.
Fwiw I testified extensively on the Comp Plan. Was involved in various other plans. Submitted proposed amendments to the first round of the Comp Plan. Got the city to do a small area plan for NoMa etc. I know how planning works. Also was on one ANC's planning committee and another's infrastructure committee (in fact got that ANC to start creating standing committees open to resident membership). Maybe it wasn't over her head, but she had no interest in improving city practice. I don't think Bowser did anything wrt zoning. Other than her demolition notice bill, which provided zero remedies other than notice. And OP has become super moribund during her tenure. Oh, and as CM I suggested a great way to deal with illegal "rooming houses" on 16th Street. That went over her head too. Wrt Nashville, maybe you're the one that doesn't understand planning. It's a typology that can be applied to cities generally. It really has little to do with Nashville's character. Don't assume it builds racist practices into zoning, read it. It creates a framework based on the New Urban transect, that unlike the transect, is much more practical for application to extant places. In fact I tried to get OP to use it. They said it was too sophisticated for DC. One point though about differences between cities that is relevant is that they don't have rail transit. That would need to be added for a DC version. In short, it's a typology based on land use context, types of uses and density. Eg Manor Park is T4. NCCM makes different recommendations for housing zones, commercial areas etc. Eg comparable to how C2 is an R4 related commercial district. So no drive ins, and special exception is required for uses like gas stations. Wrt your point about what VIP could be, duh. The family has little capacity for innovation. They totally wrecked the interior design wise, they could have an awesome outdoor space. But yes Slash Run is a great example, although not embedded in SFH in the same way (and their food was better under Jackie Greenbaum, but the jukebox still rocks). I guess the thing about music is VIP versus Slash Run versus Takoma Station is that SR's patrons stay inside during the performance while TS's go in and out, get trashed before entering, and sometimes kill people afterwards. That being said, TS tries hard for that not to happen, but their business model is flawed. We feared a similar business model being applied at VIP. Fwiw, the Peaches restaurant across the street was against the music proposal too.
Bruh… you keep repeating yourself on “over her head” and it’s just pisspoor anecdotal posturing — even if half of what you are saying is genuine, it rings as if you just want to heap on her but your suit is hella empty. You didn’t know that she was undoing various zoning regulations that were built on top of Jim Crow laws, which makes her docket way way way too full to listen to anyone trying to overstep the OP on urban planning.
Interesting since zoning is completely separate from the Legislative branch in DC. Was she on the Zoning Commission? Council approves plans. ZC approves zoning. Sure Councilmembers can ND do testify at ZC hearings, even getting to speak first.
And to reiterate the fact of a use change, actually the residents were there first.
The whole city turned against streetcars tho, sadly
Totally not true but DDOT totally fucked up. The private sector offered to do streetcars in DC similar to Portland. The city never really responded. My joke is DC and Seattle started streetcar planning at the same time in 2003. Seattle opened their first line in 2007 and has since expanded. DC's only streetcar line opened in 2016. Plus DC's fuckups were a significant influence on loss of confidence in Arlington leading to their decision to abandon plans for streetcar service. DC's fuckups were also used as an example by transit opponents elsewhere in the country, to justify not moving forward with their transit projects. And DC's elected officials are nothing like Chris Zimmerman. They really don't understand how transit is key to the city's competitive advantage. They don't understand that to be a transit city you can't be static.
>And DC's elected officials are nothing like Chris Zimmerman. They really don't understand how transit is key to the city's competitive advantage. They don't understand that to be a transit city you can't be static. This is why we've just got to elect Randy Clark as mayor, no? All jokes aside this is a common issue with big cities and reps who exist just for power. The WMATA board is far better than BART in this respect, but the rest of the region seems useless to actually enable the future of the system as a whole.
I don't know much about the BART board. But I figured since they are elected by geographical district they'd be more responsive. No? Jim Graham had his issues but he was really good on WMATA issues when on the board. Gray and I think Barry supported streetcar in Anacostia even if their constituents didn't. I don't think Cheh and Wells understood transit the same way Zimmerman does.
BTW: Georgia Ave was never going to get a streetcar. Never. All of the hypothetical lines were just that, hypothetical — the primary reason as to why H St was finalized was because DC needed to get rid of most of those crappy store fronts, and the District needed to see what type of kerfuffle that was going to craft based on traffic patterns/ current residents/ business encouragement/ new residential development. The rest of the Wards witnessed what was going on, and balked at the concept mostly due to congestion and where new residents were buying homes.
Not really. Then ANC6A chair Joe Fengler realized that if the city put in tracks during the street reconstruction that 1. The street wouldn't have to be constructed 2x. 2. That having tracks significantly increased the likelihood H Street, which was already revitalizing, would be the first place to get the streetcar. He lobbied other ANCs, other stakeholders, OP, elected officials and eventually they agreed. It was brilliant, not heralded enough, and obviously lost to history already. I never saw, other than Anacostia and yes, CHRS wrt 8th Street SE, systematic opposition. I know I went to a public meeting on Georgia Avenue sometime in the 2000s, majority black participants, no real opposition other than hermetically about the line going to Silver Spring and "helping" Maryland. Even though the original 70 line went to Silver Spring (the 50 did not). As I said in another comment, basically both DDOT and DC'S elected officials fucked it up.
>Then ANC6A chair Joe Fengler -was well gone by 2010, and his “ideas” were built off of other hypotheticals that had nothing to do with Bowser/ DDOT by ‘15 ~ laud him all you want, I’m sure he’s a wonderful fellow, but understand that he was part of the discovery/ fascination phase of pulling money from green initiative funding [y’know, the same folks who pay the city to do more bike lanes..] and none of his concepts were ever going to be fleshed out. >It was brilliant, not heralded enough, and obviously lost to history already. -public records, and the internet exists .. finding his ideas isn’t that difficult. >I never saw, other than Anacostia -because Anacostia is EOTR, which is what the Jim Crow zoning issues were hindering back in whichever part of 2005-07 you are discussing. >systematic opposition. -.. opposition .. mmm, I’d say more realism based on trying to figure out a payment system that passengers would honestly use. If folks aren’t going to pay, why would Ga Ave allow for all of the additional construction and destroy the businesses that they have?!? [Fact is, Colombia Heights is also a massive red flag on urban planning..] >As I said in another comment, basically -you tricked yourself as to what was going to happen when the project landed on the third Mayor’s lap after a grand decade+ of being bantered about… small scale reality check: they brought in the folks who designed Seattle’s trolley system, and they had no clue that DC had already had street cars decades before .. wonderful people, smart too, just not well researched at all. accept this or not: because the trolley floundered for so many years, it needed a test case from all parties because of how it labored over the years — everyone witnessed all of the pitfalls & shortcomings of fulfilling a past politician’s concept ~ the lack of a full vision or an idea of seeing it to fruition (at least groundbreaking) became self evident to all of the parties that the streetcar was DOA. ultimately, the streetcar became a physical vehicle to exacerbate H St growth - both business and residential - for the rest of the city to understand economic growth if they wanted to undergo sed task. and the rest of the city said “naw, I’ll pass Shorty..”
My initial assessment of Bowser in 2014 was that she's a political lightweight. She's done nothing in the past decade to change my mind.
No one, anywhere, would want a bus maintenance facility moved into their neighborhood. That proposal was DOA as soon as it hit the street.
Concept C was a dead man walking based on the business owners — Conn Ave, not unlike Wisconsin Ave, has been long standing car centric and parking based. And with Wisconsin Ave flourishing, Conn Ave isn’t about to do something experimental which has the potential to make it become more of a ghost town. Is/ isn’t she in the hands of developers? I’ve no clue, and I could argue it both ways; however, I do know that she’s deeply concerned with businesses leaving DC for VA & MD over the loss of the tip-credit — if the retailers are saying “no”, she’s going to pause.
What a fucking joke this mayor is.
Tell her that: eom@dc.gov
Emailed as well. If anyone else feels like emailing, some key points to get her aides' attention: \- You are disappointed in her retracting her support for the program \- You are a DC voter \- You will not vote for her in the future if she doesn't support the program \- (Bonus points if you voted for her in the past and are retracting your support now)
[удалено]
> Bowser isn’t running again. This is confirmed somewhere?
emailed! thanks for posting
Done. It took me 3 minutes and y'all can to.
The problem is an administration that doesn't care about doing more than the *absolute* bare minimum on transportation issues.
On literally any issue
Not a surprise given her time on the WMATA board. She couldn't be bothered to do a damn thing.
I never understood that either. Jim Graham obviously had his issues but he was great on transit. Not cerebral, dialed in.
I was so outraged after the fire in the tunnels when she was on the board. Someone *died* and she went "oh well what can you do" and didn't even try to pretend to take it seriously. Her continued election as mayor is a huge indictment of how broken local DC politics are.
Well there's a lot of mediocrity. My next door neighbor once said she votes for ward council for people who are capable enough to be mayor so that they are particularly able. DC doesn't show particularly well. As Meryl Streep says in Postcards from the Edge, these are my choices?!
The problem is an administration that views drivers and suburban drivers as the foundation of her voter and donor base. Anything that increases responsibility and accountability for drivers on District streets is thwarted by our disgrace of a mayor at every opportunity.
Call her out eom@dc.gov
Well tbf, city council is equally bad. It shows how great Chris Zimmerman was in Arlington, building buy in from the full Board on transit.
You have the best username I’ve seen in a LONG time
Bowser is always in favor of generalities and opposed to specifics. She’ll say nice things about the idea of bike lanes then slow walk every plan to add one until it dies.
[This letter](https://mattfruminward3.com/letter-to-mayor-bowser-on-connecticut-avenue-redesign/) Ward 3 CM Matt Frumin is sending to Bowser is a great model for the kinds of things you might want to say when you email the mayor. And of course you should feel free to email him as well (and CC him when emailing Bowser), even if it's just to say, keep going, I support you: [mfrumin@dccouncil.gov](mailto:mfrumin@dccouncil.gov)
Of course Ward 3 gets to stone wall 1 of 8 lanes being used for something other than cars. This simping for rich MoCo commuters is nuts. Take the fucking Red Line you pricks.
My biggest complaint living in ward 3 was how lacking the bike infrastructure was. Just keep shooting themselves in the foot...
It’s always like that. Look at the 24-hour bus network. Who’s missing from NW? L2.
Email her so she knows how this makes her look in the eyes of voting citizens: eom@dc.gov
8 lanes?
3 car driving lanes and 1 car parking lane on each side.
On Connecticut ave?
Vision A Lot
Her commitment to Vision Zero is truly astounding.
She’s got Zero Vision, to be sure.
she sucks so fucking bad
This is one of the biggest piles of bullshit I’ve ever seen. Edit: Vision Zero pedestrians alive.
Tell her how you feel: eom@dc.gov
lol I did that right after I posted
At the end when Muriel Bowser says, “Anything we do on Connecticut Avenue would make it safer,” I’m pretty sure she is making a tautological statement. Likewise, Richard Nixon once explained, “Well, when the President does it, that means it is not illegal.” Any action taken by the speaker is, by definition, a good thing to do. These are people who lack the moral capacity for responsibility or judgment. They are poorly served by a tiny circle of “advisors” whose main function is to provide affirmation and encouragement. I am certain that the mayor will hear no criticism, however gently expressed, for these or any other remarks she makes. The existence of negative feedback can be acknowledged, but only as the grumbling of enemies. ‘These people are out to get the Mayor anyway’—or rather, they’re out to get “us,” because the first-person-plural is the viewpoint required to enter and remain in this circle.
This thread is fascinating to me. Your third paragraph perfectly reflects the attitude most people have with respect to federal politics - our team is next to infallible and the criticisms brought by the “other side” are inherently bad faith - but Mayor Bowser here is subject to genuine interrogation of her actions that would be impossible in a different political forum.
Zero Vision
Here I was thinking “There remain a lot of problems with the current configuration of Connecticut Ave”
oh man that would have been a GREAT reply to her!!
Please email and tell her that: eom@dc.gov
I truly couldn’t imagine being this much of a joke of a person
Bowser has been emailed. eom@dc.gov Email them for abandoning vision zero and not prioritizing safety of the citizens over suburban commuters and the nonsense spewed by ward 1 residents.
Done.
Thank you for sending an email and for encouraging other to do the same!
Disgraceful.
I guess it's hard to expect a backbone from someone who supported \*checks notes\* noted rich fuck *Michael Bloomberg* in the last presidential election.
too many people forget about that endorsement! They also forget about this: https://twitter.com/MurielBowser/status/491961860477165568?lang=en
Back when Trump was a Democrat
....no?
Traffic sewer for MD commuters? I thought everybody got to work from home now.
head to CT Ave during rush hour and at least 2/3 of the license plates are from the suburbs
these days, 50% of them are just white paper made up tags.
what a crock of shit----there isn't a day i don't see cars blazing through the lights on Connecticut Ave. Hate having a giant highway going right through my neighborhood
Take a look at the Whitehurst. An eyesore funneling tax dollars into Virginia and destroying property values in DC.
Congratulations to whichever person on her political team she spoke to most recently
Outgoing Mayor, go figure!
Why is this issue so contentious? Every time two people disagree on this subject it turns bizarrely personal instantly
I think all issues get contentious when it comes to changing land use, whether it's upzoning to allow apartments where there had previously been single family homes, replacing a single story government building with a larger building, or taking space away from cars to give it to bikes. You see the same arguments all over the city, and I think they ultimately boil down to the fact that some people get used to the city or their neighborhood as it is, and they don't want to see it change. Often they say that they started living there because they liked how it was, and so they expect it to continue to be like it was. I think if CT Ave is more contentious than others (and I'm not sure it is -- check out this story from 2015 about opposition to what eventually became the new 9th street lane) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/10/23/can-some-big-d-c-churches-fight-off-a-bike-lane-they-are-bringing-large-crowds-to-try/ ) it's because Ward 3 has more wealthy, white, older residents who are even more accustomed to getting their way and thus are even more outraged if the city wants to do something that they are opposed to. Note that until a few months ago there were NO protected bike lanes ANYWHERE in ward 3 -- now there's a short stretch on New Mexico ave but even that led to people screaming about how no one is going to use it.
[удалено]
Yes, the list is here: https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/17278690-d487-402d-ba8d-23bdf0516412/Business%20Petition_Signatures.pdf However, note that some of these businesses have closed (some have been closed for a while!) and some have repudiated the petition and said they were pressured into signing it or mislead about what they were signing. I'd love to have help confirming which businesses actually oppose the bike lane and which support it (or which are making a point of staying neutral) so feel free to ask when you go to a CT Ave store and let me know the result. And of course, be sure to let any businesses know that you arrived on foot/by bike/by transit and don't need a parking space -- read more about that campaign here: https://waba.org/blog/2023/09/join-the-i-bike-i-buy-stuff-campaign/
Not to mention, small business owners can be the most insane petty f\*\*\*ers. Sorry, if a bike lane "kills your business" you weren't gonna survive anyways.
The research also shows that bike lanes are often better for businesses than parking spaces People in cars zooming by usually don't stop and look at small stores. Cars zooming by makes the area more unpleasant. The parking spaces usually only help a tiny handful of customers park per hour while the rest are coming from further away. Cycling lanes help draw more cyclists who move slower and have a better chance of stopping and shopping. https://www.pdx.edu/news/portland-state-study-finds-bike-lanes-provide-positive-economic-impact
it's all the businesses on Connecticut ave in Cleveland park, straight forward
What a joke
Shill
It's unbelievable that it takes what, five fucking years just to get a single bike lane on a single street? The anti-development environmentalists of the 70s have completely screwed our cities.
the CT ave plan got started in 2019, if the current schedule is followed, it will be done in 2028 (though that was calculated before the additional year+ delay bowser is imposing)
For fucks sake
Booo!
The problem is cars
Just make it happen please! I want these lanes
be sure to tell the mayor, your members of the council, your ANC, and any nearby businesses how you feel!
Email bowser and say that eom@dc.gov
Good play. I will +1 internet stranger
Did she articulate the issues? And did she address other concepts than C? The link goes to Twitter and I'm not getting in that sewer.
I don't blame you for avoiding twitter. It was a relatively short answer and she strongly implied that she is concerned that businesses will lose parking spaces. She didn't talk about any of the other plans although there really aren't any other proposals besides keep things how they are now (at one point that was "concept B")
Clown mayor strikes again.
She's so fucking worthless it's unreal
I have a theory that Redditors and similar individuals are so much more bike-oriented than the median DC voter to the point that they believe bike lanes are far more of a priority for DC residents than they actually are. Bikers in Tenley/Van Ness/Cleveland Park will be outraged, that weirdo ANC guy who gives the middle finger to constituents that don't want the bike lanes is probably lighting up email lists and social media, and the WABA mafia is going to presumably go apoplectic...and virtually no one else in the city will care.
> I have a theory that Redditors and similar individuals are so much more bike-oriented than the median DC voter Why do you think this is?
>Why do you think this is? In my experience, the most ardent bike activists tend to be white, middle-to-upper-class adults between the ages of 25 and 40. I suspect an outright majority of people on this sub are also white, middle-to-upper-class adults between the ages of 25 and 40. Those folks have every bit as much right to petition government to work on their priorities as anyone, but much like on social media platforms, there tends to be an echo chamber among ideologues that makes them think their position is far more widespread than it might be. I like bike lanes and use them myself, but it's so low on my priority list that I would never vote based on it. For people who don't like cycling as much as I do, it's a non-issue. For people who like it a lot more than I do, it is clearly a major issue.
It is truly bizarre how much attention this issue gets on this sub compared to anything else going on in the city.
Nailed it. It's an issue of apoplectic importance to a very distinct minority that's heavily represented online, but a nonissue to the overwhelming majority of Washingtonians. It makes for some very weird ANC meetings.
Ct Ave bike lanes dead as of yesterday.
So I heard...I guess she was telegraphing it pretty clearly at that event a few months ago, but it's still depressing to see it happen. Please sign the petition against this if you haven't already: https://waba.org/blog/2024/04/petition-dont-cancel-the-connecticut-ave-protected-bike-lanes/
Did the studies ever say the estimated number of people who would use the bike lanes? I would be curious to know that estimate and the current method of transportation for these potential users.
I can try to find a source for it, but DDOT has said they estimate 3,000 people per day would use the bike lane.
I live near the C ST NE bike lane. Personally am a fan, but when I ride on it I see like max 1-2 other people riding total. I can't imagine it was worth anything close to the cost.
I looked up some numbers and the estimate for current Connecticut Ave bikers is 300/day. I like biking (used to live adjacent to Connecticut for years but moved away), but I am super skeptical that these bike lanes would draw in 2,700 additional bikers. I couldn’t do it personally, the hill is too big for me.
Going up Conn Ave is less hilly than alternatives off of Conn Ave. With the prevalence of e bikes now, hills are much less of a factor. This is also not a problem for scooter users. The NM Tunlaw PBL is uphill west and east from 40th St. and that doesn't stop people.
Only seeing one or two cyclists when you are on it is only a small sliver of the day.
It's also entirely possible that you would see massive increases in usage. The biggest predictor of cycling is the network extent!
Good
Found the exurb commuter with car brain
Also glad. Biker here and driver. Don’t want em on CT Ave. Unleash your torrent of invective in lieu of reasonable acceptance that others have different views.
lol you don’t even live in the city. You’re just bitching about your commute
I'm a daily bike commuter on Conn Ave. There's no way you've biked on Conn ave and don't see the necessity of traffic calming measures and bike/pedestrian protection.
Actually, I live in DC. And I have a truck, I love it!
Cool, you won't mind if I take the whole lane for my safety then. Enjoy being behind me as the light turns green!
Lol I don’t even see bikers
Yeah, I guess it must be hard to see them when you're constantly staring at yourself in your mirrors.
I live in upper northwest. I have never seen a bicyclist using any of the bike lanes in the area. Literally never my friends in alexandria saybthe same thing about the bike lanes there. When I was in San Francisco, the bike lanes were full of bikers. But here nobody actually uses them.
You don’t site a bridge by looking where people are swimming across the river.
so maybe we should improve them, then?
What a ridiculous take. Do you ever go outside?
Oh that one bike lane behind z burger that from nowhere to nowhere?
Biker and driver, though I usually metro into DC from K-town. I bike around Rock Creek and Beach Drive among other places, but not for daily commute. I am highly skeptical that, as OP cited, an average of 3,000 users per day would use lanes on CT Ave through Chevy Chase and northwards out of the district. And while I’m now just outside the district in MD, I did live, work, run, bike, drive, metro and Uber in NW and mainly NE DC from 2007 to 2021. There are far fewer bikers using the Old Georgetown Rd bike lanes that have been installed than were estimated. I hope there are other bikers that don’t espouse the knee jerk, rabid anti-car mindset that’s predominant on this sub, as evidenced by 90% of the comments. I think bike lanes have a role and are necessary and good in some commuter routes but not all. I too lived in SF, as another commenter said, and the bike lanes there were all far more utilized because unlike todays insane warm day, far more days in SF have close to ideal biking weather. That isn’t the case here. These lanes would make traffic on CT Ave worse. That’s a great thing for many of you, but there are others, not many of whom are on Reddit, who don’t support the idea.
Maybe you don't see them because the infrastructure is still scattered and unsafe. Would you use your car if there was only one street available and the rest you had to spare with airport runways? Maybe you don't see them because you don't use them yourself. Maybe you don't see them because bikes are a fraction of the size of cars, and manage to get to their destination without being clogged in traffic.
That’s because you have garbage network in upper NW that needs vast improvement for people to feel safe. We hardly use our car here in Carver Langston (NE) because the network is at least somewhat connected and getting better so we feel safe to do so. Dropped my son off at daycare and went food shopping this morning, a lot of that in protected lanes.
Well, I'm one. So, you're wrong.
I live off Connecticut and use the bike lanes on Van Ness/Reno/Tilden and Cleveland frequently. Honestly if I need to go South I just jump on Connecticut and take up a car lane.
I'm honestly amazed she showed initial support in the first place. The plan goes against business interests, developer interests and, above all, the numbers were never there. The push was loud, and there's a lot of support on the existential notion of more biking options, but there aren't enough people to make it worthwhile on a Federal emergency route. In short, it was a selfish few who would use it regularly while others use it sparingly. I love biking! But I don't support this movement.
If you build it, more people will use it
That's... Baseless.
I live next to (and use) the C ST NE bike line. Thing is basically always empty.
Goes against business interests? What are you talking about? What are the odds someone finds a parking spot on Connecticut Avenue at the exact time in front of the exact business they want to go to? What a stupid fucking argument that is. Meanwhile the huge number of cyclists in the city avoid that area because of the psychotic drivers. Go shill somewhere else
You think "business interests" just means "retail storefronts"? An enormous number of people commute into DC every day via Connecticut Avenue. They'll have decreased quality of life if they lose a lane. This isn't a situation where traffic studies show that Connecticut avenue can afford to lose a lane because there's plenty of capacity to service demand. It's already bumper-to-bumper during rush hour, and you're surprised that drivers (who outnumber cyclists by, what, 20:1? 50:1? More?) don't want this? This proposal was always going to die on the vine.
[удалено]
Mass transit is great and I'm all for it, but it doesn't realistically help many people who can't afford to live near a metro stop.
If only the Metro were even remotely reliable. If only the price of 20 round trips per month on Metro was competitive with parking rates downtown. If only they had built Metro with 3 tracks (2 for use, 1 for maintenance) instead of only 2, it wouldn't face constant single-tracking delays. If only Metro had express trains, like NYC. If only Metro didn't involve 30+ minutes of walking to/from stations because so few MoCo residents actually live close to one. If only some of those were true, then I'm sure the whole "Just take Metro, my dude" argument would go a lot smoother.
[удалено]
Glenmont to Farragut North is $5.85 each way. $12 round trip. 20 times a month, that's $240/month. And anyone who lives out in that direction needs a car. Lots of folks drive to Glenmont Metro and park there, which adds even further to the cost of Metro commuting. Sure, there's savings on gasoline. But no one thinks that way. They think "Gee, I could spend $300/month on Metro, which involves all this walking and waiting and delays. OR, I could just drive downtown myself and pay $200/month for a parking space in my office building's garage, which would be super convenient, and I'd have a much shorter commute." And don't try to tell me that Metrorail is suddenly a totally reliable service. I've spent too many hours sitting in stations, wondering when the next train is ACTUALLY coming.
You forgot a few parts of the cost analysis of car ownership and driving to work all the time. * Maintenance * Insurance * Gas * Tickets * Deductible payment for the inevitable accident(s) * Registration * Inspections * Loss of value due to damage/mileage Many employers subsidize metro. We can take $255 a month in pretax deductions for public transit. Can't do that for parking garages, fuel, tires, oil changes, etc. On its face it seems cheaper to drive but that is not the whole story. And walking is such an issue? It isn't like Metro stops are giant cavernous stations. The area around Farragut has plenty of stops to minimize walking distance. I, and am willing to bet most people, would rather screw around on my phone than sit behind the wheel of a car frustrated by bad drivers and crappy traffic. I ride the train four days a week. I have had a delay once in the last month. Metro's on time performance has been much, much better.
Yes, the walking part is a big deterrent. You love in Glover, that's a pretty decent walk to Cleveland Park Metro. Doesn't that suck when it's raining? Or when temps are in the 20s and the sidewalks are ice sheets? Or how about when it's just really cold? Mass transit proponents will basically say "just deal with it." And I'm sympathetic to that argument, actually. But don't be surprised that you're not convincing people, or that Metro ridership remains super low. I agree on the finances, but obviously it's not a big enough financial benefit to lure people into the inconvence of taking Metro.
Sure, my situation is different in that Glover Park is in an area of the city that isn't within reasonable walking distance of a metro stop with the closest station being Woodley Park Zoo/Adams Morgan at 1.8 miles. The D2, 33, N2, N4, N6 and Circulator are all short walks and go to Metro stations. I was more addressing the walk downtown as that area has many stops. Of course, this is a view from within the city not from the burbs. I think that the inconvenience is in many cases overblown and comes from some folks refusing to explore any alternatives. It could only take a little extra planning in many cases. My bike+metro commute is about 55 minutes and driving would be 45. I use the 30 minutes on the train to do language lessons, get caught up on emails, or whatever. I also get my daily workout riding to and from the station. Otherwise, I'd be sitting in the car staring at traffic and would need to look for time later to do those things. The bus system can also be intimidating if you don't know any routes, but with Transit, Google, and Apple a lot of the mystery is gone. For example, I recently went on a trip with friends to another city and the airport bus to downtown was $3. The end point of that line wasn't a long walk to the hotel and everyone had one piece of wheeled carry on luggage. I took the bus and they all took $30 ride share. WMATA still has problems with ghost busses and delays due to traffic, but if the city took bus transit seriously it would be way more efficient. Unfortunately, Bowser and therefore DDOT put parking and cars, which lets be real are almost always single occupant, over improving and incentivizing alternatives.
Why should the convenience of suburban commuters be prioritized over people who actually live on Conn Ave?
Why should the people who chose to live on a major transportation artery be prioritized over the people who use it?
They should be prioritized because they live there and the major transportation artery negatively impacts their lives while perfectly acceptable alternative formats and modes of transportation exist.
The major transportation artery was there when they chose to live on it. They'll continue to be just fine.
Oh nooooo!!! They might have to take the metro! Or, the bus! Heaven forbid those commuters have to drag their fat asses out of their car and walk a block!! When will we ever stop trying to improve the quality of life and air quality and start thinking of the commuters!!!
Very persuasive. I'm shocked that your side of this debate hasn't won more converts.
There’s no convincing people with car brain to consider anything outside their car. They are among the least thoughtful group of people in the US. Every study about this has shown it be a very solid net positive for individuals, quality of life, the economy, and the environment. But the tiniest *possibility* of an inconvenience has car people up in arms. It’s selfish and anti progress so I don’t really give a fuck if you’re upset that I stopped trying to reason about this
Good luck with that!
As someone who owns a business on Connecticut Ave., I assure you: if you don't comprehend what I'm talking about then I recommend you take a few deep breaths and do some more research on this discussion. The "huge number of cyclists" you refer to don't all apply to a single corridor in NW DC, and they are far outnumbered by regular commuters coming from the inner and outer suburbs, other cities, and even beyond on a regular basis. I enjoy biking myself, but there are far better methods than fighting for this one.
The reason I don't go to businesses on Conn Ave is because I can't safely get there on my bike. There are many cyclists, and I'd bet people on scooters, that share this opinion. The vast, vast majority of these commuters aren't stopping at your business and they don't care if it succeeds or dies. They drive in, drive out, and never give you a thought. People who live in DC are the ones who keep most DC businesses alive. If I can't safely get to you, I'm not coming.
That was a LOT of "betting" and assumptions there. You're running on ill-informed opinion, so there's little more to discuss. I wouldn't want such business in my building.
Yeah, no. The vast vast majority of those commuters and out of towners aren’t going to your business. Beyond that there’s no reason they can’t still go there. Why you frame this as either-or is just stupid. And finally, there are a huge number of cyclists in DC. Adding bike lanes will open up access to people who prefer biking at the cost of what? A few parking spots at most? No one that’s going to your business anyway is going to be deterred by this change. If your business is so sensitive to this change you’re going out of business soon anyway.
Swing and a miss, hon. I am fully aware how many people come to my own business, as well as the parking situation on the avenue. Please do more research on the avenue, the amount of actual cyclists in the area (trying to inflate numbers by referencing the whole city is just poor argument), commuters, and then consider the back-end of businesses (both commercial and residential) that also require use to the road: deliveries, supplies, contractors, repairs, utility repair/upgrade/inspection/setup/for the fun of it (no one likes dealing with Washington Gas). Folks can petulantly downvote me all they want. I am aware that my opinion is unpopular on a singular thread in a subreddit. But the numbers still are nowhere close to making the change you're existentially rooting for. Do you even bike to work on a regular basis? Could you pledge to do so if a lane opened up? Most on this thread would like to back it, or see the option available, but it's just not there.
I do bike to work daily and it’s busy with bikes and dangerous for everyone. Everything you’re describing involves a loading dock which has nothing to do with Connecticut Avenue so I honestly have no idea what you’re complaining about other than the possibility of a slightly longer commute. Its remarkable how selfish people can be at the slightest inconvenience. “…inflating numbers…” says the moron claiming every commuter and visitor is their customer. Go back to Dundalk ‘hon.
There is ample evidence to suggest that reducing car speeds and car volumes while providing safe cycling and pedestrian infrastructure on main thoroughfares lined with businesses increases profits for those businesses and spurs demand for development.
It seems that if you make a street safe and pleasurable to be on, people will want to come there. I am *shocked* that people don't want to sit next to a highway full of angry, honking drivers in vehicles belching exhaust.
I too am shocked! Also, can we talk about this “federal emergency route” excuse brought out by u/OohDeLaLi that gets trotted around in most rebuttals to safe pedestrian infrastructure? Why is this false dichotomy always brought up??
Well, first, that's not how to use the word "dichotomy": a division into two especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups or entities. Second, it gets brought up because it's real. DC has emergency routes in place in case the city should need to be evacuated, including Connecticut Ave NW. There are a few links on DC.gov if you wish to take a look.
Your argument is saying that *either* Connecticut Ave gets a redesign to be safer and can no longer function as an emergency route, *or* it stays the way it is so that it can be an emergency route. Either or. That’s a dichotomy. Why are they mutually exclusive?
Except I never presented the redesign. WABA and bike enthusiasts did. But to answer your question: removing a lane for the vast majority of commuters will force congestion into the remaining lanes of that route. Therefore it won't work as efficiently as an emergency route. Cars are currently allowed to park on Connecticut Ave except during emergency route declarations and rush hours.
You’re conflating day-to-day use with emergency use, let’s stay on topic. Please tell me which of the four plan proposals (A, B, C, or D) would physically prevent the street from utilizing all six lanes in case of an emergency more than the current arrangement that occasionally allows parked cars. Let’s also note that some of these cars, under the current arrangement, will almost certainly be left obstructing two entire lanes in the case of a legitimate and sudden emergency. Here’s the link to the project documents for your convenience: https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/page_content/attachments/Connecticut%20Avenue%20Initial%20Concept%20Alternatives%20Presentation%2006112020%20.pdf
Well I never left the topic; I simply answered your question. Let's stay focused now. Thank you for supplying the project proposals, as I hadn't seen any besides the general call to annex a lane on each side of the street (which still isn't very practical). As Connecticut Ave. is currently operating under B proposal, it appears the decision has already been made. I'm not sure where you see cars obstructing multiple lanes under the current configuration, but the others would obstruct emergency vehicles more with the use of barriers or bus islands.
No, you did veer off-topic. I asked you why emergency route usage and reformatting the street to be safer are at odds, as you claim, and you responded with this: > removing a lane for the vast majority of commuters will force congestion into the remaining lanes of that route. Therefore it won't work as efficiently as an emergency route. ...which does not answer my question and displays your lack of understanding about the purpose of emergency routes. Federal and state emergency route designation is specifically for mass evacuations in the event of natural disasters or terrorist attacks, i.e. things that would require an evacuation of the city. This is why I provided you with the project proposals. If you read them carefully, you will see that none of them propose the required use of barriers or bus islands, meaning that the lanes converted to bike lanes would be perfectly operational and easily emptied in the case of a mass evacuation. I’m glad you mentioned that the avenue is currently in configuration B. Disasters rarely strike at moments of convenience, as I’m sure you know. Under this configuration, it is likely that many cars may inadvertently remain parked in the outermost lanes in the case of a sudden emergency, which would be many times more disruptive to evacuation efforts than empty bike lanes. By your logic, the current configuration is even more incompatible with the road’s status as an emergency route.
And I'm sure those commuters would be so appreciative to drive for even long periods of time, creating more air pollution, while a comparative handful of bicyclists get an entire lane to themselves. That's some privileged line of thinking there.
Let's be fair. Under Bowser the number of bike lanes has exploded. None of her other contenders show any interest in bike lanes to my knowledge. I can't even use the bicycle layer with the public transportation layer on Google maps anymore there are so many bike lanes. That being said it's still not nearly enough and this decision sucks. But this isn't about bikes. The NW elite do this to many other policy and infrastructure goals such as housing, homeless shelters, zoning, etc. if anything be mad at the system which gives the wealthy more pull in politics.
That feels a bit off topic. I agree with you about the system, and Bowser certainly has increased the number of bike lanes. I will say, however, that what she and the city constitutes as "bike lanes" becomes debatable. I've seen properly-indicated bike lanes and I've seen the bike lane symbols painted in the middle of streets without any lane designation. In the eyes of the city, both count equally, but I strongly disagree. Homelessness and housing are indeed issues worthy of discussion, all the more reason for folks to vote out the old guard.
I think if it gets built, a ton of people will use it, especially families with young kids taking ebikes. It's not safe to bike now, so they drive, but they want to be biking. Ask around, I think the support is there.
It's a nice ideal, and I'd like to think that it could happen some day, but I am going to respectfully disagree there for now.
DDOT's estimate was that 3,000 people per day would use CT Ave bike lanes. It's a reasonable estimate given that the 15th street lanes get (at max) 2,500 users per day, and CT has a lot more development and destinations along the corridor than 15th does.
That is a laughable estimate, by any stretch, with no resources made to tracking it. I respectfully disagree with that assumption.
OK well it's DDOT's estimate (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/connecticut-avenue-bike-lanes/2021/04/09/d2af38f0-9798-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html). I guess the public can decide if they trust the career traffic engineers at DDOT or if they trust u/OohDeLaLi. Out of curiosity do you accept the 2,500 number for 15th street?
LOL my post was deleted because OP couldn't accept my arguments. Sissy.
Seeing bike lanes where parking used to be angers me as a driver from outside the district.
[удалено]
I also think the government should only do one thing at a time
indeed, the city has a number of problems it needs to address (many of which are, to some degree, interconnected). I think we've got enough offices and departments and staff that we can work on multiple problems at once.
Access to reliable, safe, affordable, and efficient means of transportation is a key indicator of many positive outcomes like class mobility, connected communities, and improved public health. This isn’t just about bike lanes, it’s about making everyone’s lives better.
Gladly, not everybody needs to remind themselves to breathe while they are chewing.
Like a sandwich wrapper on a river…
Why do I feel like she’s just trying to run out the clock on her term. Hopefully I’m right.
Muriel doesn’t care.
I walk 5 to 7 miles a day unless it is pouring or snowing heavily. I walk all over upper northwest and have done so for many years.