Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Transportation Home  |  Discussions  |  Traffic  |  Columns  |  Q&A     |      Twitter |    Facebook   |  phone Alerts

Closings set for Rock Creek Parkway

More difficulties for drivers using Rock Creek Parkway: From this Wednesday through the end of August, work along the side of the parkway may require temporary closings of the southbound lanes and the adjacent trail just north of Q Street NW.

This will usually mean closing the right-most southbound lane only, but sometimes, both the southbound lanes could be shut. None of the closings would occur during rush hours.

Drivers will need to watch for flaggers directing traffic along the parkway. Trail users will need to look for signs directing them through the construction zone when a portion of the trail is temporarily diverted.

The National Park Service says the work is part of an effort to close sewer outflows and improve Rock Creek's water quality. Contractors for the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority will be working at several sites along Rock Creek, the park service says.

The area of the lane closings and trail diversions is between Georgetown and Dupont Circle. It's north of the zone disrupted by the Ohio Drive SW lane closings, though some drivers may encounter both during their trips.

Veterans along this route will recall the parkway construction project of a few years ago that stalled traffic between P Street and Virginia Avenue. This, at least, is a much shorter term project, and much of it will be done during summer vacation season, when traffic is lightest.

By Robert Thomson  | June 8, 2010; 8:10 AM ET
Categories:  Advisories, Commuting, Construction, District, Driving  | Tags:  Dr. Gridlock, Rock Creek Parkway  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: 6th St NE blocked at C St
Next: D.C. revises bike lane plan

Comments

Can we please ban cyclists from using the roadways during rush hour? They slow the flow of traffic by riding in the middle of the road and increase the risk of an accident as impatient cars try to pass.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | June 8, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

"Can we please ban cyclists from using the roadways during rush hour?"

Isn't this a bit out of character for an "anarcho-liberal-tarian?"

Posted by: Cossackathon | June 8, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

See what happens when you get freeways canceled?

Thanks to the cancellation of the Center Loop, I-95 through NE DC and I-70S, Rock Creek Parkway became a commuter route - a de facto freeway - instead of the scenic drive it was intended to be, just like the GW Parkway.

Think of that the next time you want to oppose a highway.

Posted by: ceefer66 | June 8, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Can we please ban cars from Rock Creek Park? It's a National Park established in 1890 for the express purpose of preserving the natural environment of the park. Using it as a commuting thoroughfare severely degrades the ecosystem. In addition, thousands of turtles, deer, foxes, rabbits, opossum, squirrels, and other creatures are victims of drivers selfishly spoiling an irreplaceable resource for their commuting convenience.

Posted by: krickey7 | June 8, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Ahhh yes, because everyone always has to DRIVE everywhere.

Now, if we had built rail.... imagine how many people we could move into/out of the city with more extensive rail lines.

Nah. Unamerican. MORE ROADS!

Posted by: Greent | June 8, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Freeways? We don't need no stinkin' freeways!

We have Metro, a clean, efficient, safe, on-time, transportation system connecting affordable city housing with every workplace, grocery store, and venue. Cars are so last century.

Posted by: seraphina21 | June 8, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

@Coassackathon - I ride a motorcycle. But I was trapped behind a car, following a cyclist who wouldn't ride on the trail (where all the other cyclists were riding) who blocked traffic from north of Military to past the Zoo. The car was tailgating. I hung back but the speed was well below the posted 25 mph.

Dangerous and frustrating.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | June 8, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

The law says we can ride on the road, which is, by the way, absolutely the safest place to be. Frustrating for you, perhaps, though I'm guessing that after you passed the cyclist you caught right up to the traffic ahead, so you actually lost no time. That trail is positively unsafe at any speed above walking speed.
Motorized vehicles are degrading the environment in Rock Creek Park in direct violation of the public trust for which the park was established. I find that frustrating, too.

Posted by: krickey7 | June 8, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

@krickey7

"Can we please ban cars from Rock Creek Park? It's a National Park established in 1890 for the express purpose of preserving the natural environment of the park. Using it as a commuting thoroughfare severely degrades the ecosystem. In addition, thousands of turtles, deer, foxes, rabbits, opossum, squirrels, and other creatures are victims of drivers selfishly spoiling an irreplaceable resource for their commuting convenience."


See my earlier post for the reasons why Rock Creeek Parkway is used the way it currently is. You can't have your cake and eat it too. That traffic has to go SOMEWHERE.

@Greent

"Now, if we had built rail.... imagine how many people we could move into/out of the city with more extensive rail lines."

You mean the nation's second largest subway and third largest commuter rail system isn't enough? When is enough finally enough for you people?

Ever stretch that narrow mind of yours to imagine that the fact this region has the 22d SMALLEST highway network of the nation's 25-largest metropolitan just might have somthing to do with the traffic congestion. Of course, not. you would rather just hate cars and recite slogans, since THAT doesn't require any imagination or thought.

@seraphina21

"Freeways? We don't need no stinkin' freeways!...

...We have Metro, a clean, efficient, safe, on-time, transportation system connecting affordable city housing with every workplace, grocery store, and venue."

METRO is "clean, efficient, safe, on-time"? ROTFLMAO!

I won't even bother to argue with that since it has no basis in reality or the facts - especially those of the past 12 months - speak very well for themselves.

Anyone besides me remember the 9 people killed in the Metro accident last June?
seraphina21 obviously doesn't.

@seraphina21
"Cars are so last century."

Bicycles, trains and streetcars are so century-BEFORE-last. So your point is...?

Keep it up, guys. You're batting 1.000.

Posted by: ceefer66 | June 8, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

S/B "2nd SMALLEST highway network of the nation's 25-largest metropolitan areas".

Posted by: ceefer66 | June 8, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

seraphina was being sarcastic.
As for where the traffic goes from Rock Creek Park, there are two parallel roads within a mile. Two subway lines also run parallel. Most of the vehicles in Rock Creek Park are single-occupant. There is a theory that posits that new expressways creates its own demand by reducing the time-cost of travelling that route. The logical conclusions from that are (1) the expressways you advocate would have hit peak capacity long ago, and (2) if one increases the time-cost of travelling along the roadways adjacent to the Park, people will shift to Metro or other routes. People adjust.

There was a proposal to switch Rock Creek Park to HOV during rush hours; I'd support that.

Posted by: krickey7 | June 8, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

krickey7 - a bicycle is single occupant.

have them repave the trail, but either do the posted speed limit or get out of the road.

i can deal with a bicyclist because im on a motorcycle, a car has nowhere to go.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | June 8, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I bike the Rock Creek Parkway Trail into work almost every day, ride the trail (and not on the main road with cars) and have no problems with the condition of the trail whatsoever. It's congested at certain areas, but I have never had any problems getting joggers or slower bikes to move with a simple, polite ring of my bell.

Posted by: serialcarpins | June 8, 2010 11:59 PM | Report abuse

A-L-T:
The law says the speed limit is actually the upper limit, not the lower.
I'm not sure how I could make anyone repave the trail, even if that were to fix the issues of hairpin turns and frequent deposits of sand and mud. More importantly, I don't have to. Not even for your convenience.
Feel free, though, to keep avoiding the topic of how the use of the Park as a commuting thoroughfare is inconsistent with the express dedication of the Park for public recreation and preservation of the natural environment.

Posted by: krickey7 | June 9, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company