Comments on Reconstruction of 17th Street NW to begin Monday - Greater Greater Washington

Comment by David C

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:30:17 EDT

For many years the city has been reducing the number of parking spaces in the area. I think they do this so they can write more tickets. First of all, the only parking that will be removed - according to this post - is bike parking. So if you know of parking removal let us know about it. How many spaces and where? One of the advantages of multispace meters is that you can park more cars in the same space than with individual meters, so it may be that there is less "space" for parking, but no fewer "spaces".

Second, I'm not sure why you have to ascribe some nefarious plot like secretly wanting to hit people with parking tickets. DC makes $50M a year on parking tickets, removing a few spaces here and there is not going to make the District rich. In my experience, DC has been VERY reluctant to remove parking spaces. Usually when they do - like on 15th - it's so that they can make space for other road users, not so they can increase parking ticket revenue. If you have any proof to the contrary I'd love to hear it, but otherwise it sounds like a crackpot conspiracy theory.

based on the experience of P Street, the people who live in the area can expect their rent to go up as the landlords pass along the property tax increase. I'm guessing you mean the increase in property tax caused by an increase in property value? I suspect that will happen, but DC has laws against allowing that to happen too quickly. Property values generally go up, as places become more desirable. Making the district and its neighborhoods more desirable is what the government is supposed to do, IMO. If they trucked a bunch of hookers and drug dealers into your neighborhood would you cheer and say "Hurray, now my property taxes will go down!"?

Comment by Charlie

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:42:55 EDT

I attend meetings in the Dupont Circle area several times a week. The missing parking on 17th Street will impact the whole area. For many years the city has been reducing the number of parking spaces in the area. I think they do this so they can write more tickets. This will just make it even more time consuming to find legal parking spaces.

And based on the experience of P Street, the people who live in the area can expect their rent to go up as the landlords pass along the property tax increase.

Comment by g

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:53:40 EDT

How about protecting the bike lane by putting it on the other side of parked cars (like 15th St, but not contraflow)?

Comment by Rich

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:39:47 EDT

Easily one of the more un-needed projects in the District.

Comment by J

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:45:13 EDT

I just can't understand the irrational fear of benches in DC. Oh no, somewhere we can sit and enjoy lunch! The horror!

Comment by Rambuncle

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:25:00 EDT

Just a way to make Fenty's friends rich. $4.5 million dollars to re-do a few blocks?

by Oio4 on Nov 24, 2009 1:51 pm

How much do you think it should cost? Any evidence that this is an unreasonable amount of money?

Comment by shy

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:25:51 EDT

Fist Baptist Church?

Comment by David C

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:18:15 EDT

A net loss of bike parking might not be so bad if it is small and the new parking spaces make more sense. 10 spaces where cyclists need them might be better than 12 spread along the street at even intervals (what you get with parking meters). In other words parking meters are not placed based on where they'll best serve cyclists so you could get improvement and still lose total numbers.

As long as they install adequate bike parking in good places I don't care about actual numbers.

Comment by Oio4

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:51:00 EDT

Just a way to make Fenty's friends rich. $4.5 million dollars to re-do a few blocks?

Comment by Moose

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:22:59 EDT

What is the fetish with brick sidewalks in this town, especially since the DC government seems incapable of repairing them in a timely manner?

Comment by Adam L

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:56:59 EDT

I don't really know why this needs to be done now. 17th Street isn't really in disrepair. The sidewalks are uneven in a number of places, almost entirely as a result of the roots from old trees, but I can't imagine that an entire street project needs to happen just to repair those few places. In fact, I'm willing to bet that businesses will be especially hurt by these plans.

Finalizing the plans for 18th Street, especially the intersection at Florida Avenues would be money better spent.

Comment by ct

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:23:40 EDT

i believe this will be the 27th time that the intersection of 17th and r will be torn up since i moved there five years ago.

Comment by Joey

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:20:36 EDT

Resurfacing the entire sidewalk seems a little expensive and excessive for not much benefit. Restructuring the geometries and adding the other tangible features seem beneficial, but the concrete-and-brick sidewalk appears really nice as it is. Why the added expense of rebricking it all?

Comment by Jasper

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:14:03 EDT

Hmm. Still see very rounded corners on the intersections.