MBT/8th NE PBL Support Letter

[LhasaCM]

Good morning!

As some of you may have seen, a few weeks ago DDOT came back to “the community” to present its revised plan for adding protected infrastructure on 8th NE to close that on-street gap of the Metropolitan Branch Trail. The plan calls for a west-side two-way protected cycletrack, with one-way “general” traffic and one side of parking. The side of parking alternates on a few blocks based on the current land usage. It’s not a perfect plan, but pretty darn good.

Unfortunately, the “parking lobby” is starting to rally support against this plan, because of the usual reasons. This is despite the fact that almost all of the homes facing 8th NE have off-street parking available (either in a parking garage or alley), so the parking ‘losers’ really are the commuters that take advantage of the unzoned spaces. In any event, to show that they are outnumbered, some of us in the area have drafted a letter of support for DDOT’s overall plan with a few comments on minor tweaks we’d like to see made. If you’re so inclined, and haven’t already, I’d greatly appreciate it if you could sign on to show your support. A link to the letter is at https://mailchi.mp/10da8fbbe58d/8thstreetmbt

Thanks!
-Chris

Topic

[elbows]

What’s the status of the opposition raised by some of the local businesses along there? I don’t have the letter handy (I believe it is on twitter), but it was signed by Annie’s Hardware and City State Brewing. Thanks.

[LhasaCM]

@elbows 219216 wrote:

What’s the status of the opposition raised by some of the local businesses along there? I don’t have the letter handy (I believe it is on twitter), but it was signed by Annie’s Hardware and City State Brewing. Thanks.

Muted, but still simmering. At the ANC SMD meeting where DDOT presented their plans, Annie’s Hardware was clearly displeased, but didn’t say anything in the meeting. Another business owner spoke up in opposition (as an avid cyclist who also decried the lack of blinkers on many cyclists on 8th NE because safety is a shared responsibility and other BS), but by and large, it seems the businesses are relatively resigned.

FWIW – right after the letter came out, City State did a good job of backtracking to make it clear that the PBL was critical; their preference was just two-way traffic vs. retaining parking. Annie’s Ace was of a similar mindset. DDOT initially pushed back on the letter very well; the issue that arose (per DDOT) was that they screwed up the road width, thinking they had 37 feet to deal with and not 35. Granted, the only reason they have so little ROW is because they’ve effectively given it to the local businesses (Sunbelt’s property, like a lot of DC lots, ends at their building; the driveway/parking lot is in the ROW as is the roadway they take up).

[Author]

Replies