Report a Comment

U werent' at the meeting. The whole point is to provide the backbone of urbanism to be able to extend urbanism within that corridor, and in relationship to the new development that will come over the next 20 years.

The problem with how the meeting was termed beforehand is that given the expressed sentiments at other planning efforts for a broader transportation study, including discussion of crosstown streetcar service, people were disappointed.

That being said, despite the disappointment and Harriet Tergoning's willingness/agreement to slow the process down, people still stayed and did the breakouts, including some of the people who during the meeting expressed some of the most vehement sentiments.

If the presentation had been a bit more exhaustive, and had they been more direct about the scope, a lot of the vehemence would have been headed off probably.

by Richard Layman on Jan 14, 2009 6:47 pm • link • report

Does this comment violate Greater Greater Washington's comment policy? If so, you can report it using this form and an editor will take a look.

What is the major reason you believe the comment violates the policy?
Comment is spam.
Comment attacks other individuals personally.
Comment criticizes the level of knowledge of another commenter or contributor.
Comment discourages others from posting their ideas.
Commenter is impersonating someone else.
Comment uses profanity or abusive language.
Comment advocates violent acts or harm to another.
Comment was posted in multiple areas of the site.
Comment is arguing about the comment policy.
Other:

Your name:
Your email:

Administrator page • spam