Showing posts with label Connecticut Avenue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Connecticut Avenue. Show all posts

Saturday, September 14, 2024

NIghttime lane closures ahead at Chevy Chase Lake


Watch for nighttime lane closures on Connecticut Avenue between Jones Bridge Road and Dunlop Street in Chevy Chase beginning tomorrow night, September 15, 2024. The Purple Line construction-related closures will take place as needed for about three weeks. Crews will be completing utility work under the Purple Line bridge at Chevy Chase Lake during that time. Work hours will be from 9:00 PM to 5:00 AM.

Monday, November 19, 2018

State proposes third left-turn lane on Jones Bridge Road at Connecticut Avenue

Traffic jam on Jones Bridge Road
at Connecticut Avenue
The Maryland Department of Transportation is proposing another BRAC-related traffic project for the troubled intersection of Jones Bridge Road and Connecticut Avenue. MDOT plans to add a third left-turn lane on Jones Bridge for eastbound drivers turning onto Connecticut.

A public meeting to provide information on the plans is scheduled for Thursday, December 6, 2018 from 7:00-9:00 PM in the cafeteria at Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School, located at 4301 East-West Highway. There will be no public testimony, and no formal presentation will be delivered. Instead, there will be displays set up around the room and state officials standing by to answer questions.

The proposed project plans indicate MDOT will also add improved stormwater drainage and a shared-use path. MDOT says it plans to begin relocating affected utilities at the intersection as early as this fall, even though the project design is not yet complete.

Despite previous expensive projects to add turning lanes at this spot, traffic remains jammed during rush hour, and whenever there is a large exodus of employees from the base trying to reach the Beltway. The real solution is to force the Pentagon to use the direct Beltway access points into Walter Reed National Military Medical Center that were planned and provided long ago, which would take Walter Reed-Beltway-related traffic entirely off of local streets and avoid all signal timing problems at the busy Jones Bridge-Connecticut intersection.

Friday, June 01, 2012

COUNTY PLANNER: "PUBLIC BEARS ALL OF THAT COST" FOR BUSES "NO ONE IS GOING TO USE" WITH BRT PLAN

The week had been going so well for the less than 20 supporters of the Montgomery County BRT Rapid Transit Vehicle (RTV) plan.

Just this Wednesday, a Gazette column ostensibly dedicated to the frustrations of driving in Montgomery County, Bumper to Bumper, was dedicated to BRT supporters' noble quest for "an alternative."

While revealing how ponderous mass transit can be, and not identifying the specific routes he took - so readers could double check if he really took the fastest bus and subway routes - the author ultimately did not explain how BRT would help him.  No planned route would travel directly from Takoma Park to Germantown.  And it's no wonder he could not provide specific time savings.  As I proved here on this blog, BRT can be as slow or slower than current bus or car options.  Would you pay $1000+ a year in new taxes for that?

How refreshing, then, to discover the first remotely objective mainstream media report on BRT, in today's Washington Examiner.

Rachel Baye's article quotes Montgomery County Master Planner Larry Cole as saying the population density is insufficient to support BRT, and won't be dense enough for at least another 30 years.

As I have been pleading with county residents to understand on this blog for months, Cole says the proposed system and financing is such that "the public bears all of that cost."

And that $2 billion question I've been asking:  "Where is the evidence we'll have the ridership?"

Cole's remarks support my skeptical position:  "You don't want to build something no one is going to use," Cole warned.

Wow.  Does that sound optimistic to you?

Scrambling to defend the pet project of less than 20 county officials, most unelected by the public, Councilmember Marc Elrich only further weakened their straw-grasping case.

Elrich referred to commutes from Glenmont to the west of the county as a major problem.  "This is about moving the people from where they live to where they work."

Unfortunately, only a small minority of commuters are heading to Rockville or Gaithersburg during rush hour.

And even for those commuters, better and cheaper options than BRT exist.  They include current automobile and bus routes, in some cases, and the ICC.

The unbuilt Rockville Freeway would be the best option for Glenmont residents.  For well under $1 billion in construction cost, the Rockville Freeway would carry Glenmont drivers and bus riders at 55 MPH from the Georgia Avenue interchange to Veirs Mill Road and 355.  At a fraction of the cost, the Rockville Freeway would move more commuters per day than the entire BRT system!

Elrich's second example was Connecticut Avenue between East-West Highway and the Beltway.  First of all, any Connecticut Avenue driver can tell you the backups go way further north than that.

But here's the real reason we have backups there:  Unbuilt highways.

The Rockville Freeway, Northwest Freeway, North Central Freeway and Northern Parkway were all planned decades ago to prevent just the gridlock we now have along the 355 and 189 corridors.

Not to mention that county planners warned politicians during the 70s that the Rockville Freeway and a widened Metropolitan Avenue connection to the North Central Freeway were required to support just the growth they were then approving in the Kensington area.

What we need is not a BRT boondoggle, but to build our master plan highways.

Now let's find out if Cole is forced to "walk back" his absolutely devastating, honest and frank comments on Montgomery County BRT.  Very inconvenient truth, at a critical time.

Friday, March 30, 2012

BETHESDA / NW DC
CRIME WAVE
UPDATE

Has the Park Bethesda Ski Mask
Gang Reemerged on DC Side of Line?

Another Robert Dyer @ Bethesda Row Exclusive!!!

The January 19 Park Bethesda armed robbers remain atop Bethesda's "Most Wanted" list.

No incidents fitting their description (3 robbers using firearms, wearing ski masks, assaulting and robbing victim of property) are found in the Montgomery County Police official crime report.

However...

Let's check SpotCrime's unofficial report:

Assault, 5000 block of Dalton Road, Bethesda, 3/24/12

Robbery, 4200 block of Connecticut Ave. NW, DC, 3/28/12

***Armed Robbery, 4000 block of Connecticut Ave. NW, DC, 3/28/12
According to SpotCrime:
Metropolitan Police Department officers reported an armed robbery "at gunpoint" at 2:01 PM on Tuesday, March 28. Suspects described as 2 black males, who fled the scene and are still at large.

This sounds somewhat like the ski mask gang, fits their m.o. of operating near Metro stations on the Red Line (Van Ness, in this case), but there are only two robbers mentioned. And there is no specific mention of them wearing masks. Is this a different group, or have they lost their Third Musketeer?

Were they the same guys who committed that second robbery on Connecticut that same day? That second incident (above) does not mention "armed" but it is reminiscent of how the ski mask gang struck on Wisconsin Avenue one night, the victim escaped, and then they struck again just a few blocks south.

It's a waiting game at this point. Certainly, there were no armed robbery incidents reported in nearby NW or Bethesda for several weeks. No official information on this incident is available, which is strange, because the SpotCrime source for this says the robbery was reported by MPD units.

No crimes of any kind were reported in the Westbard Sector this past week. Police remain on patrol in the area.

Nothing's changed at the Westwood Shopping Center; large portions of the parking lot were pitch black again for the entire week, as of last night. Park Bethesda residents must brave the darkness to walk over to the Giant or Rite Aid, as Capital Properties - for reasons still known only to them - simply refuses to activate full lighting on the property at night.