“DDOT to Host a Second Public Meeting for Eastern Downtown Protected Bike Lanes”

bike lane study
Photo by PoPville flickr user Elvert Barnes

From DDOT:

Saturday, February 6, 2016
12:00 pm – 4:00 pm

(presentation at 1:00 pm)
KIPP DC WILL Academy- Auditorium
421 P Street NW
Closest Metro: Shaw (Green, Yellow) Bus Line: G2

The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) will host a public meeting for the Eastern Downtown Protected Bike Lanes Study. The purpose of this meeting is to present draft alternative designs and the no-build option with the results of a traffic analysis for each. The meeting will have both an open house, with an opportunity to learn about and discuss the project, and a presentation followed by an opportunity for public testimony.

DDOT has been conducting a data-driven study to identify an alternative for a protected bicycle lane in the eastern portion of downtown Washington, DC. The study area is bounded by Florida and Constitution Avenue in the north and south and 4th to 9th Streets NW to the east and west. The project would connect more areas of the District by bike and continue to build a network of quality bicycle facilities. moveDC, the District’s multimodal long-range transportation plan, identified the study as a priority in the 2-year action plan.

The study team has met with area stakeholders, and gathered feedback from the October public meeting and the project website to gain a better understanding of transportation and community impacts as a part of the alternative refinement phase. This meeting will present the “no-build” and four alternatives for further comment and refinement.

For more information about the project, visit dccycletracks.com”

21 Comment

  • If you would like to see the bike lane built it is important to show up and support it. Last time a large contingent that was against the bike lane showed up and got DDOT to switch from considering 4 different bike lane options to 5 options which now includes a no build option.

  • At the last meeting the opposition bussed in UHOP parishioners from Maryland who then looked me and my cyclist friends right in the eye and told us they would run us over if we were ever in their way on the roads.

    • That’s a criminal threat. I recommend recording it and calling MPD. File charges.

    • Stop trying to shut churches down please. Rude.

      • Stop trying to deny bicyclists a safe commute please. Selfish.

      • If the congregants of the church behave like children they should be shouted (not shut) down. And bike lanes don’t directly or indirectly shut churches down. That is a specious argument by people who just don’t want things to change in a world that constantly changes and don’t want to give up their protected status.

      • Discussing plans that potentially remove some free public parking near churches is NOT trying to shut churches down. Sheesh.

    • Someone should conduct a sting operation with hidden cameras and microphones to capture the unreasonable hostility, much of it racially motivated, to cyclists and bike lanes.

  • It would be wonderful if the meeting were perhaps limited to people who lived in the neighborhood. I couldn’t even get into the last meeting there were so many people from neighboring States that had been brought in to oppose the lanes.

    • That seems to be a common tactic of the “anti-gentrification” crowd. A scheming ANC rep tried that in Brookland with petitions to oppose the opening of a restaurant. Many of the signatories were Maryland residents who attend a church in the neighborhood.

      • is that legal? For out of state people to be included on a DC petition? I don’t know how these things work.

        • He’s talking about the Carolyn Steptoe/Brookland’s Finest kerfuffle. I think the signatures were ultimately disqualified, since they all used the address of the church. Signatures for were also collected once the shenanigans came to light (and the FOIA/court action, of course). Still held up the process, though, and some businesses can’t afford substantial delays in their permits and survive.

    • It’s tough to say where to draw the line, though. I live in Columbia Heights. My kids go to school in Shaw. Do we live close enough to get to have an opinion? What if I lived in Cleveland Park but worked at Gallery Place and wanted better bike infrastructure for my commute?

      I don’t mean to attack you or your point – I agree with you for the most part, and my initial reaction to the first meeting was “next time don’t let the [expletive deleted] Maryland people in”, but the more I think about it, the more I think we can’t say “you have to live exactly here to have a valid opinion”.

    • some cyclists commute through this area from neighborhoods north of there, so it would make sense to get their opinion. by that logic, as much as i hate to admit, you’d want to have drivers who come from outside the area involved as well. maybe you could make a case for not allowing people from out of state as they’re not taxpayers in dc (especially if they’re associated with a church (also tax exempt)). the brunch money they bring on sunday, imo, doesn’t really make them a sufficient stakeholder to make a long term infrastructure decision.

    • This issue largely affects non-residents, though, on both sides. Bicycle commuters through and to the neighborhood and Churchgoers who visit the neighborhood to worship.

      • Um, I ride my bike to church, several times a week. I avoid what would be the southbound ideal route — Sixth Street NW — because of the insane drivers on a weirdly wide road, and the crazy parking by visitors from Maryland.

  • You know, the one place a Mayland parishioner can’t exert undue influence in DC is in the voting booth. Remember this kind of nonsense on Election Day (especially on primary day for the Dems).

  • I’ll be at work, but yes, by all means, cyclists need to show up at this thing. Call out the out-of-staters, especially those who made threats last time!

  • Unfortunately I will be at work at this time, but by all means, cyclists had better show up! This is especially true if the opposition is making violent threats.

Comments are closed.