by Livia Bardin
Concept C, the officially adopted plan for bicycle lanes in the DDOT Connecticut Avenue Reversible Lane, Safety and Operations Study, is fine for bikes, tough on cars, and disrespectful of the thousands of people who live in the apartment buildings or work in the businesses that line the avenue.
As DDOT engineers design the details, they must recognize that Connecticut Avenue is much more than a commuter corridor. Planners seem focused on the five morning and afternoon weekday hours that we’re inundated with commuters. But the rest of the time – 19 hours every day, and 24 on weekends and holidays – Connecticut is our urban “Main Street,” combining commercial and residential areas that bring people out in the neighborhoods all day, every day.
Thousands use local bus and Metro stops daily, according to WMATA statistics. Public transit users walk to and from their stops and destinations. Add the many pedestrians who do errands on foot every day. City planners agree on the importance of pedestrian movement and access. Yet Concept C does nothing to encourage people to walk or use public transportation – and by adding bike lanes, the concept in some ways makes it harder to walk as well as to live here.
Residents of the large apartment buildings that line the Avenue are short-changed under Concept C. We will lose parking places, delivery access, and drop-off/pick-up spaces for infirm people who must use taxis or ride shares. And we will lose additional parking spaces because Concept C’s design requires loading/unloading space on the side streets.
As DDOT works on the details, the residents and businesses can demand an outcome that better meets our needs. Here are elements that would make the plan tolerable:
1. Bus stops at the curb. Concept C shows them there. Let’s keep them there. Curbside stops relieve anxiety about crossing bike lanes or stepping off a bus onto a strip of raised pavement between two streams of oncoming traffic. Buses run infrequently. Bike riders can wait behind them for the minute or two they are stopped. If you want us to use fewer cars, DDOT, don’t make it harder to reach buses.
2. Prompt and easy access for emergency vehicles. The protective barriers between bike lanes and car lanes must be easily crossable for fire, ambulance, and police vehicles at all times and in all areas.
3. Drop-off, pick-up areas for stores and residential buildings that lack driveways. Some apartment buildings have driveways that allow for drop-off, pick-up, and delivery stops. For those that don’t, provide for brief curbside parking at their entrances. Similarly, provide curbside drop-off and pick-up spaces for businesses. Bike riders can manage an occasional bypass around a passenger car or Metro Access van, just as they can live with curbside buses.
4. Handicapped access and parking. Under DC law, handicapped persons may apply for a reserved parking place on the street near their homes (see page 3 of the linked document). Concept C should provide the spaces needed at every apartment building, plus handicapped parking spaces on both sides of every commercial block, to enable handicapped drivers and passengers to patronize nearby restaurants or get a haircut.
5. Adequate side street space for loading and unloading. US Mail, FedEx, UPS, and contractors like plumbers and carpenters unloading equipment for work need 15 minutes or more and a convenient space.
6. Longer-term side street parking spaces (four hours or more) for contractors and other workers like cleaners and healthcare personnel who work in the buildings. These spaces could be made available after business hours for resident parking.
7. Adequate width on side streets for vehicles to pass loading/unloading vans and trucks, many of which are wider than passenger cars, when there is oncoming traffic. This may necessitate eliminating parking spaces on both sides of the street. Congestion on side streets is likely as more cars seek parking space off Connecticut Avenue. It’s only reasonable to allow space for vehicles to move in both directions past parked trucks.
8. More stop lights are essential. “Yield” and “Slow” signs impress neither drivers nor bicycle riders. Again, if you want us out of cars, DDOT, stop lights at every through intersection will make it safer to get across the street.
9. Enforce the speed limits for cars and bicycles alike. In general, speed limits are not enforced. If MPD patrolled for speeders the way they do for rush-hour parking violations, Connecticut Avenue would be safer for all of us: bike riders, pedestrians, and drivers.
These are all practical measures that can and should be part of the final design. I call upon our ANC commissioners and our newly elected Ward 3 Council member to see that these (or better) measures are included.
What’s your view? Forest Hills Connection welcomes op-eds about neighborhood issues. These are our submission guidelines.
LEE MAYER says
While I applaud the writer’s recognition that bike lanes don’t belong on Connecticut Avenue, many of her suggestions aren’t feasible. One of her statements is inaccurate – buses will not have curb access under Concept C. In fact, there is no curb access for anyone (except cyclists) under Concept C so there won’t be any curbside handicapped parking spaces either. Forget about curbside pick-up at restaurants and other retail businesses unless you want to risk parking in one of the two remaining traffic lanes and getting a ticket. Putting pick up drop off spaces and loading zones on side streets will only exacerbate parking problems and make side streets more dangerous. Cyclists won’t be safe either. There are over 100 driveways on Connecticut Avenue and most cycle accidents occur in intersections. I do agree that adding traffic lights at all intersections is needed.
William says
The Op-Ed is describing a solution that would be unworkable. The fact is, there is 24/7 parking on CT Ave under Concept C, something that doesn’t exist today. A lot of that parking can be made priority for people with disabilities. There is also room for commercial loading and unloading, as is the condition today- that doesn’t really change.
Moving the bus stops to floating curbs is totally acceptable and safe – safer in fact than the current conditions. Go to 14th and V Street to see how well it works.
What does change is that one of the existing car lanes becomes two bike lanes and the other car lane becomes parking and turn lanes, thus allowing for better car traffic flow than exists today.
Finally where emergency vehicles are concerned, they will operate as they do today and as they will need to in the future – blocking whatever lanes necessary for the first responders to do their jobs safely. Access to the curb lanes is not a necessity and really, the last several times I have seen them in action, they block 1-2 lanes to do their jobs.
Green Eyeshades says
Items 5, 6 and 7 in the main blogpost above concern “side streets” and would require re-design and/or re-signage of side streets. If I recall correctly, Concept C is a design concept for “redesign of Connecticut Avenue,” i.e., only the Avenue, not the side streets. The side streets are outside the scope of the DDOT project.
The first comment on this blogpost claims that the author of the main blogpost recognizes “that bike lanes don’t belong on Connecticut Avenue.” Perhaps the first commenter was thinking of some other publication by the same author. But the main blogpost does not say that “bike lanes don’t belong on Connecticut Avenue.”
The very first sentence of the main blogpost states “Concept C, the officially adopted plan for bicycle lanes in the DDOT Connecticut Avenue Reversible Lane, Safety and Operations Study, is FINE for bikes ….” [capitals added] In the third paragraph, the main blogpost does implicitly criticize bike lanes, stating “by adding bike lanes, the concept in some ways makes it harder to walk as well as to live here.” But there is no evidence that it would be “harder to walk” on a sidewalk when bicycles are confined to dedicated, protected, bike lanes, and the commenter doesn’t point to any such evidence.
Commenter William has paid attention to the design details in DDOT’s graphics, slides and maps. I wish more community members would study DDOT’s actual maps and design plans instead of reflexively repeating their anti-bike-lane mantra.
The most recent maps I am aware of were posted on the Connection in July 2022, here:
https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/ddot-collecting-publics-comments-on-upper-connecticut-avenue-safety-concepts-through-july-31/
The Connection notified the community in September 2022 that DDOT would conduct walk-throughs of several stretches of the Avenue to focus on parking and loading needs: https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/ddot-holding-connecticut-ave-walkthroughs-to-discuss-parking-and-loading-needs/
In October 2022, the Connection reported on DDOT’s responses to concerns raised during the walk-throughs, here: https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/connecticut-avenue-updates-ddot-walkthroughs-few-details-on-future-public-engagement-how-bikes-and-walkers-might-interact/
The October 2022 Connection link essentially refutes everything stated in the main blogpost above and in the first comment about parking, loading, parking for disabled drivers, and safety for bus riders. Indeed, the October 2022 report includes this paragraph about bus stops: “At bus stops: Changes would include moving stops, and adding safe boarding accommodations such as platforms at the same level as the sidewalks. There may also be signs, street markings and traffic calming features on the approaches to the stops.”
Some of the links to DDOT content in the above three prior Connection articles (July, September & October 2022) are broken, but DDOT maintains useful separate “Concept Maps” of eleven separate segments of Connecticut Avenue showing the multiple ways the redesign will make the Avenue safer for all users. All eleven maps are listed in the middle of this DDOT node: https://ddot.dc.gov/node/1478186
Three of the Concept Maps seem to be most relevant to our neighborhood. They are Concept Map Six ( https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/Map%206%20-%20Tilden%20St%20to%20Veazey%20Terrace.pdf ), Concept Map Seven ( https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/Map%207%20-%20Veazey%20Terrace%20to%20Albemarle%20St.pdf ) and Concept Map Eight ( https://ddot.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddot/Map%208%20-%20Albemarle%20St%20to%20Davenport%20St.pdf ).
Please read those maps before denouncing Concept C for not including safety measures that the maps show are, in fact, included in Concept C.
Green Eyeshades says
There is a footnote 2 on each of Concept Maps 6, 7 and 8 which states as follows:
“2. CURBSIDE PARKING AND LOADING LOCATIONS ON CONNECTICUT AVE AND ADJACENT SIDE STREETS WILL BE MODIFIED AND REFINED BASED ON A DETAILED PARKING ANAYLSIS [sic] TO OCCUR IN COORDINATION WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.”
So, to that extent, parking & loading on side streets are within scope of the Connecticut Avenue redesign, contrary to the first paragraph of my comment above. But the fact that DDOT will consider modifying and refining parking & loading on side streets as part of Concept C refutes items 5, 6 and 7 of the main blogpost.
Ken Kensington says
@Green Eyeshades post was thorough and thoughtful and demonstrates that he/she, unlike the author of this blog post, has been engaged in this very long and iterative process and has studied the actual proposal rather than relying on the inaccurate and sometimes provocative pronouncements from the anti-bike lane crowd.
A couple of additional points Green Eyeshades missed.
On point 2 to piggyback on the authors suggestion that the new design think about the 168 hours a week the road is not in rush-hour configuration during that 90% of the week the traffic flow on Connecticut Avenue in fact will be much improved over the status quo because most intersections will have turn pockets (queue lanes) for turning cars that don’t exist today – these are mostly left hand turn lanes but in a couple of spots there will be new right turn lanes. Both of which will increase the roads throughput for cars – today a single car waiting to turn left constricts the capacity of an intersection to 1 thru traffic lane, usually for the entire light cycle. In the future that turning car will be in the turn pocket and two lanes of traffic will flow thru the intersection. But just as important it is critical to be honest about the baselines – currently during that 90% of the week the right and leftmost lanes are filled with parked cars. Which is to say that emergency vehicles in the future will have the same 2 lanes in each direction to get through that they have today except there will be more traffic flow because there will be 2 lanes open for traffic.
On point 8 again the blog poster reveals their lack of knowledge about the actual proposals and lack of attendance at the public meetings. DDOT currently is proposing to add 2 additional Hawk signals at intersections that are lacking them along the corridor – I believe with these 2 Hawk signals almost every intersection in the corridor will be signalized in some manner. The author didn’t mention this but DDOT is also looking at the pedestrian crossing times at every signalized intersection to make sure they are adequate to enable people to cross safely and have even looked at the uses on each block thinking about who might be crossing.
This is not a process about just adding protected bike lanes though that of course is what the opponents only seem to be able to focus on.
This is a process about re-making Connecticut Avenue into a complete street that better serves everyone who lives on and uses the avenue – the proposal will make the Avenue safer to bike on but also safer to walk on and use public transit on and in fact will also improve the driving experience by smoothing out the flow of traffic.
Lee Mayer says
William stated that some of the 24/7 parking spaces on Conn Ave can be made available for disabled persons. THE DDOT maps eliminate 469 parking spaces and over 42% of pick up and drop off locations. Parking and PUDO’s will be on one side of street only will likely not work for most mobility challenged individuals. By way of example, there are only 2 parking spaces and one loading zone between Nebraska Ave and Legation. These are located in front of the Montessori School. That’s not going to help the disabled. It should be noted on this stretch of Conn Ave the bike lanes and buffers are 9 feet wide on BOTH sides of the street. Access to the curbs on both sides of the street is vital.
Robin P says
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that *most* parking should be removed from Conn Ave, with limited parking retained on a block-by-block basis where there is retail or residential that either needs it for ADA compliant reasons (and all of those spots made for ADA-covered users only) or PUDO/very short term parking (15 min) for the “just be a minute” types like uber eats drivers.
For anyone who is able, taking up a parking space on a main thoroughfare away from either a cyclist, a bus, or, yes – even active motorists, is an absurd use of space. People can walk. Parking is readily available on side streets up and down the thoroughfare.
Removing parking removes obstructions. It increases sight distance. It retains the road for actual road users (cyclists, buses, and motorists) to use it. Having free or heavily discounted space for multiple-hour car storage for able-bodied individuals is nuts. Its a shame that in America the *car lobby* has brainwashed the whole country for generations to see it as “normal”.
Livia Bardin says
My thanks to those who took the time and effort to comment. My concern is to make this project successful for all of us who live and work in these neighborhoods.
Pedestrian safety entails more than removal of bikes and scooters from the sidewalk. Changing a usually four-lane into a six-lane street makes it riskier, not safer, to cross the street. When two of the six lanes are used by unregulated vehicles – not even required to have lights – whose operators need not know or respect the traffic laws; and when there is no effective enforcement mechanism even for those who run red lights, how is the pedestrian crossing safer?
Regulating bikes or bike riders isn’t the answer. Children, teenagers, and whoever else wants to, should be encouraged to ride bikes. Nor is a licensing system a solution. How can anyone identify an offending bike from the tiny plate on its back(if it has one)?
As to bus stops, the maps Ed Stolloff, DC’s manager of the project, gave me during the October 11, 2022, walk through my neighborhood, shows them at the curb on Maps 5, 6, 7, and 8B, with exceptions of southbound stops on Maps 6 and 7B. The many urban planning websites I searched indeed promoted mid-street bus stops with pedestrian “islands.” All their idyllic illustrations showed the “islands” in daylight and good weather, with the bus at the stop. The passengers waiting to board weren’t carrying bulky packages, pushing strollers, or using walkers or wheelchairs. But it gets dark on Connecticut Ave every night. Bus riders may have to wait for twenty minutes or more in situations far more exposed to the weather than if they were on the sidewalk. And DC’s bus shelters are purposely made uncomfortable to discourage users from sitting for long.
Then there’s the reality of DC’s existing bus islands. Anyone who views the K Steet example at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOtjlrc6Y74 can see how different it is from the charming scenes on the planning websites.
How is it “safer” to require people, especially those with physical difficulties, to cross a lane of unregulated traffic in the dark, especially when an oncoming bicycle may not have a light?
HAWK lights, proposed under Concept C, are better than “Yield” or “Stop” signs, but leave too much to the vehicle operator’s discretion. The blinking red light shifts responsibility onto people’s individual judgement, which may or may not be correct. A bike rider’s view may be obstructed by larger vehicles on their left. An unambiguous stop light is a far better solution.
Lee Mayer says
Livia is correct and I was incorrect when I commented that bus stops will not be at the curb. Some apparently will be at the curb. Livia, I apologize for my error. As Livia points out there are some bus stops at the curb. As she also points out, it’s a dangerous situation. Especially when the bike and buffer zone total 5.5 feet. Cyclists will need to come to a complete stop whenever a bus is stopped at a curb side bus stop. It should also be noted that car and SUV doors swing open approximately 3 feet. Since the bike buffer in most locations is 1.5 feet, car doors will protrude into the bike lane. Connecticut Avenue is too narrow to safely accommodate bike lanes. DDOT needs to scrap that part of the plan entirely and just focus on the safety issues.