Well I see your point, but there are those of us who live in DC and work in Maryland and Virginia. Many of the anti-commuting policies that DC is advocating have detrimental effect on us as well as suburbanites. Really, in the future, you are as likely to find your dream job in Takoma Park or Reston as you are on K Street. What then?

I don't see anything in the article that would really affect a reverse commute.. can you describe the "detrimental effect[s]" of the policies on your commute?

(For the purposes of discussion, I'm ignoring the 395 plan because we all know that isn't going to happen)

And really, it seems like there are only two policies that people are complaining about: Having to pay more for parking, and not getting one-way expressway-streets.

That whole story was just a piece of sensationalism written by a Washington Post writer who couldn't find a good story by the deadline.

After reading the blog you could truly get a sense of how hateful people become when you talk about commuting and taxing. UGH.

Boo Hiss to the Washington Post for publishing that piece of crap.

this is being discussed on richard layman's blog as well. this is pretty blatantly slanted. you're absolutely right that, by couching this article in other terms, it could have been seen as pro-walking and pro-transit. it seems like a simple case of the paper looking to foment argument for the sake of creating news and selling papers.

There are a lot of examples of cities closing highways with no ill effects - Portland did that on their waterfront, as did San Francisco with the Embarcadero. Neither noticed an uptick on nearby streets.

all I know is that 95% of the cars I saw downtown after the fireworks were from MD... and 80% of those were honking their horns and giving looks of disgust when they couldn't move because the road was full of people walking to metro.

that and I again almost got run over by another MD driver on 15th street last week as he sped up and swerved when I was crossing the road.

I live in Greenbelt, MD... I still prefer less cars and more traffic calming on dc streets... (not to mention Greenbelt streets). Call me liberal but I'll avoid driving whenever I can, especially when the alternatives are better for me AND the environment (even if "the environment" we speak of is ony the air pollution I ride and run through every day just for living in the region).

Everyone here will take much enjoyment and insight from the fact that I, completely anonymous to everyone here, find this Post article to be complete hogwash.

I understand if you want to reward me in some way for providing you with the insight into what is no doubt an amazing mind. Trust me when I say the fact that my words will make you smarter, happier and more complete is reward enough. For I, boondoggle, think the Washington Post has produced an asinine piece of journalism.

and i just want to know from those who think that closing the stretch of 395 will result in traffic problems....have you driven the area around the 395/ny ave/nj ave mess? could it get any worse?

read this post at greater greater washington about using the right-of-way for the blue line separation. sounds like a genius stroke to me. almost too convenient. i love it.

Thank you for raising this issue--I thought the article was completely slanted, as well, when I read it. I wondered whether the Post was going for a shocking 'City vs Suburbs'-type coverage just to sell papers, as it was on the front page. I look forward to reading letters to the editor regarding the article. Also, query whether this article's slant is an issue to be raised by the Post's Ombudsman?

On the rare occasions that I join the rush hour commuting herd from a relatively close-in DC starting point, I have to say that I've come away impressed with the Md/Va commuters' collective resilliency -- the absurd gridlock makes me borderline apoplectic, but these brave souls endure this nonsense every day.

I think the proposal to take away the reversible lane on 16th Street is interesting when considered in conjunction with the 16th Street Line bus study. It seems to me that taking 16th Street down to 2 lanes in the peak would significantly affect the ability of buses to get people downtown relatively quickly and reliably. District planners and policy-makers need to remember that there are quite a few commuters in this city who rely on buses to get to/from our jobs. Without reasonable bus service, many neighborhoods along 16th Street would be much less desirable.

As a pedestrian, I'm not sure I buy the argument that a landscaped median is necessary in order to get across 16th Street. If I was going to do anything to improve the quality of the pedestrian experience on that street, I would widen the sidewalks and increase number of trees between the sidewalk and the road. And yes, I understand that would also require taking a lane from traffic - but if you're going to do it, do it right. Think of 16th south of U - two lanes in either direction, wide sidewalks, and plenty of mature trees.

soo who is predicting the upkeep cost of metro once people decide to commute via train/bus? it is already bad enough being packed in like sardines every morning with delays on train arrivals.

*improve, rather...

i guess, what you're saying anticritic is "DC represent!"?

Interestingly enough Mr. Weiss is (or at least was) a resident of Adams Morgan...makes one wonder whether he drives to 15th & L or takes the L2? I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that he doesn't walk down to 15th & L or he wouldn't have written that story.

Here I sit here on my balcony in Southwest DC watching those Virginia jackasses inching across the Washington Channel bridge.

Ahhhhhhh ... life is good. Life is very good in DC.

I wonder if there is a significant number of commuters who drive to neighborhoods with metro stops and then commute by train. I saw that pattern a lot when I used to live in the Boston area, and it seemed like a convenient and environmentally friendly way to commute if you didn't live near a station.

So, I'm genuinely curious here: if you drive all the way into the District for work rather than driving to a train station and parking, why? Is it really that much more convenient to sit in gridlock and then have to pay an arm and a leg for parking?

Personally, as a car-less District resident and frequent walker/biker, I would love to see more commuters take public transit into DC. There's just so much congestion, and I've almost been run over or doored by aggressive out-of-state drivers so many times...

DC should stop catering to people who don't live here. But I'm sure some silly Republican in power will be very happy to slap down the district as soon as the suburbanites who only work here complain loudly enough.

you know that the residents of the city would more than likely be willing to deal with all of the shit that comes from being a colony if the congress and suburban jurisdictions would just come out and say "sorry you get dumped on. nothing we can do about it, but we're genuinely sorry".

we'll still be happy to take your money. and don't forget to use the free valet for the trebuchet when you dine at proof...

"sounds like a genius stroke to me. almost too convenient."

Which means it can't possibly be done...

"how about we start at home, and not just "improve" but FIX the metro first, and THEN talk about forcing people to use alternate sources."

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. If you want to drive, you can. However, it may take a little longer than before and you may have to pay more to park.

@ monkeyrotica:

Am I the only one who is satisfied with DC's mass transit system? It's not Paris, or London, or Tokyo, sure, but we don't have the population to support a huge system. It's cheaper than every other major system in the eastern US, the coverage is decent given the population density (especially when you take the buses into account), the trains and stations are clean (ever been to Boston? or New York?), I rarely wait more than 10 minutes for a train (unlike Boston, New York, Philly, and Atlanta), and the system is decentralized, so you never have to transfer more than once (thank you Rosslyn, Pentagon and Fort Totten - this was one of my pet peeves about the Boston system). Maybe I'm just a little more appreciative because I grew up in a sprawling Southern city where the population is totally dependent on cars, but guys, come on. It's amazing to live in an American city where it's possible to live without a car. I moved to DC a year ago and haven't even needed to rejoin Zipcar yet. I love it.

"The most common complaint I hear from suburbanites is that many of the Metro and train parking lots are not big enough - that to get a space you have to show up really early, and by say 7 am they are all filled. I don't know how true or widespread that is, but I hear it a lot."

This is 100% Factually true. I used to do this and still have nightmares about it. Would try to park at branch avenue and metro in. Except if you didn't get there by 7AM it was completely full. So then had to go to Suitland next stop down the line. That would fill by 7:30ish. So then would have to consider drastic and imaginative ways to park. Of course the whole time metro mocks you by having tons of reserved parking spots that are very underutilized, though I am sure the tourists love them as you can park in them after 10AM. (You will get a ticket if you park earlier)

This was over a year ago so I imagine that the problem has gotten far worse as people try to limit driving as much as possible. Also the response I hear from other people is that the other park and ride stations are exactly the same. Metro needs to expand their parking badly, though I imagine they are making nice money off the parking tickets of desperate commuters.

So, I'm genuinely curious here: if you drive all the way into the District for work rather than driving to a train station and parking, why? Is it really that much more convenient to sit in gridlock and then have to pay an arm and a leg for parking?

It's usually not as simple as hopping on a metro. I live in Annandale and I commute by car 2-3 days a week and by public transit the rest of the time. The fastest way to do it by public transit is to take a bus to the Pentagon, get on the metro, transfer lines, and then take a shuttle or walk 20 minutes to work. It's a bit of an ordeal and generally takes a little longer than driving.

If I drive, I have to deal with traffic but I can drink coffee on the way and there's a free parking lot where I work. My girlfriend and I commute in together so the price of gas is split in half.

Neither situation is ideal, but we pay half as much to live in the suburbs as we would in DC so it's worth it. I imagine for those living even further out in the suburbs, the public transportation situation is such a hassle that they'd rather sit in traffic.