Greater Greater Washington

Promised pedestrian fixes now "not a priority" for DDOT

DDOT and residents worked together to prioritize and fund pedestrian safety enhancements along Connecticut Avenue. Now, the agency has stopped moving forward and says the fixes are "not a priority," according to pedestrian advocates.


Photo by thisisbossi on Flickr.

Last year, Connecticut Avenue Pedestrian Action (CAPA), organized by IONA Senior Services, worked with community volunteers and staff from Toole Design Group to develop a plan to improve pedestrian safety on the busyand sometimes deadlyConnecticut Avenue corridor.

Since then, CAPA has been working with DDOT planners and engineers on a first round of improvements, including identifying funding for the changes.

However, CAPA organizer Marlene Berlin told CAPA volunteers and supporters in an email last night that "Everything was ready to go and was stopped in its tracks because," according to DDOT, "it is not a priority."

This project is another example of how DDOT's energy to move forward with meaningful improvements for walkers and bike riders has all but vanished in the past few months.

While the precarious future of downtown cycle tracks is the most high-profile example of the agency's lethargy, it's disappointing to see the malaise begin to infect small-scale neighborhood improvements, as well.

Funding was available for changes to increase the length of walk signals and establish leading pedestrian intervals at 12 intersections in Woodley Park, Cleveland Park, Van Ness and Chevy Chase.

CAPA is also pushing for two new pedestrian signals at Northampton Street and between Ordway and Macomb Streets.

CAPA suggests that supporters email DDOT Director Terry Bellamy and Councilmember Mary Cheh, the new chair of the Committee on Public Works and Transportation. Here's an email text they suggest:

I am a CAPA (Connecticut Avenue Pedestrian Action) supporter who supports the pedestrian audit of intersections on Connecticut Avenue. After all the work of over 80 volunteers on this audit, I want you to support this effort by directing your staff to implement CAPA's recommendations to increase traffic light timing on Connecticut Avenue which George Branyan and Wasim Raja have been working on and progress has been halted. Also, we need DDOT to install much needed pedestrian signals, one at Northampton and another between Ordway and Macomb Street on Connecticut Avenue. Please let me know when DDOT will take action.
Update: DDOT spokesperson John Lisle says: "At this point there's no indication we've halted anything. Trying to determine why they think that's the case and to put together some specific information" to explain the issue. We'll post more as we get it from John.

Update 2: Marlene Berlin writes:

As a result of the emails that everyone sent, I got word that, in fact, the traffic engineers had continued to work on increasing traffic light timing on Connecticut Avenue, but lines of communication had broken down. So on 7/21 the work orders will be submitted, and by the end of October, the project will be fully implemented.

As for the pedestrian signals, Cleveland Park with get one in Spring 2012 between Ordway and Macomb, and DDOT will do a warrant study on Northampton in August 2011. The traffic engineers need more information than what was included in the Rock Creek West Livability Study to determine what kind of signal would best be suited for this intersection. I will keep you posted.

I am still waiting on word from MPD about the status of their contract for increased photo enforcement.

Thank you for all the emails.

Stephen Miller lived in the District from 2008 to 2011 and is now a student at Pratt Institute's city and regional planning masters program. 

Comments

Add a comment »

This is Mary Cheh's ward, so I'd be surprised if things don't get moving again soon.

by Phil on Jul 20, 2011 11:20 am • linkreport

Should any of this be a surprise given what Gray ran for during the election? He is merely going by his promises to prioritize non- Smart Growth issues as they do not concern his Ward #9 constituents.

by w on Jul 20, 2011 11:24 am • linkreport

"This project is another example of how DDOT's energy to move forward with meaningful improvements for walkers and bike riders has all but vanished in the past few months.

While the precarious future of downtown cycle tracks is the most high-profile example of the agency's lethargy, it's disappointing to see the malaise begin to infect small-scale neighborhood improvements, as well."

More simply put, you get what you vote for.

by freely on Jul 20, 2011 11:25 am • linkreport

I'm not terribly concerned. There was an election. A coalition with many components got Gray elected. One of those components is a kind of "rump" of the DC electorate that's prefers the suburban car-oriented form as the model DC should follow. Fortunately for urbanists, among DC residents, the demographic trend for that group does not look good.

We're only beginning to see the beginning of these social trends, and as DC's voting population continues to change, it's inevitable that it's policies will change as well.

Too bad so many folks got rooked into voting for Gray as a "protest" against Fenty's "corruption", though. Better to have three steps forward than two steps forward, one step back.

As more new residents pour into the city--and as more long-term residents are exposed to the positive changes that have already taken place--we're going to see

by oboe on Jul 20, 2011 11:29 am • linkreport

...a resumption of sane policies in the not-too-distant future. (also, "its", not "it's").

by oboe on Jul 20, 2011 11:31 am • linkreport

Bellamy said he thinks DDOT is still pursuing these improvements.

by Tina on Jul 20, 2011 11:44 am • linkreport

About that endorsement David..

by Phil on Jul 20, 2011 11:44 am • linkreport

I'm honestly not sure why funding is even an issue for some of these improvements. Do 'Walk' signals require more electricity than 'Don't Walk' signals? #nonsense

by Dan on Jul 20, 2011 11:53 am • linkreport

Of course it's a priority. Just a low one. Perhaps you inquired what are higher priorities?

by TGEOA on Jul 20, 2011 11:53 am • linkreport

In researching the article, I wonder whether this article represents information based on something other than what CAPA has stated. The DDOT update seems to contradict this presentation.

Oboe, that's true but it wrongly assumes that those who voted for Gray partly in protest (like me) are disappointed that the timeline for certain DDOT projects have been extended or at this point, TBD. I'm not sure if your assumption reflects the reality out here. Maybe among your peers...not mine though.

Yes, believe it or not, transportation is not at the forefront of many DC minds. Imagine the shock and horror!!!

by HogWash on Jul 20, 2011 11:55 am • linkreport

Egads, people, let it go already.

by Bossi on Jul 20, 2011 11:55 am • linkreport

oboe has this right-- these sorts of elections and policy issues are ultimately zero-sum games between interest groups. Those of us on the urbanist/pedestrian-policy side lost, and our priorities are going to get shafted in favor of the competing interest group. Want DDOT to take our priorities seriously? Then we have to defeat the competing interest groups at the polls.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 11:58 am • linkreport

@Dan

There is a cost associated with sending an intern out to the street corner to count peds/bikes/cars go by at various times (Rush/vs. non) then go tabulate the results. Then there's a program you have to run to recalibrate the timing so every user gets the best level of service. Then you have to send someone out to repogram said intersections.

So yes, there are some billable hours associated with doing this work. But not nearly on the scale of adding capacity to a road or elsewhere.

by jj on Jul 20, 2011 11:58 am • linkreport

Oboe, that's true but it wrongly assumes that those who voted for Gray partly in protest (like me) are disappointed that the timeline for certain DDOT projects have been extended or at this point,

No, I think oboe more regards you as a voter who voted not because you thought Gray would still be good at transit but because you thought that voting for Gray would finally put a stop to having DDOT deal with transit, pedestrian, and bicycle issues. In this sense, the end of the pedestrian fixes on CT Avenue is pretty much what you voted for, and, as oboe point out, the system is playing out as it should, given the election outcome.

Otherwise you'd be howling like a banshee that DDOT is paying too much attention to pedestrian issues and that the advocates had nothing better to do than pester DDOT about their petty concerns rather than staying silent and dealing with the CT Avenue problems like a good compliant DC citizen should. Except when a restaurant wants to open, and only then will it be acceptable to petition the government about your grievances.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 12:02 pm • linkreport

yeah, Ward 9 voters are really, really concerned about Connecticut Avenue.

by charlie on Jul 20, 2011 12:02 pm • linkreport

@jj, thanks for the clarification. That actually makes sense. Though, in this town, I bet DDOT could find unpaid interns to do a lot of the work. In any case, it's a really good idea whose ease of implementation should make it a no-brainer to city officials. Hopefully, we can start making other thoroughfares (like K St) friendlier to pedestrians, too.

by Dan on Jul 20, 2011 12:08 pm • linkreport


Non-sense to dump this of Gray. Columbia Heights is still waiting on such improvements since Tangherlini's time. This after multiple deaths at intersections like Park Rd. and 16th St. In fact the focus on bike lanes and street cars pushed many pedestrian safety issues to the side.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 12:10 pm • linkreport

@charlie:

Perhaps not Connecticut Ave specifically, but "Ward 9" voters are actually quite concerned with maximizing the automobile commuter experience at the expense of residents who disproportionately walk and bicycle around town.

Take the example of Capitol Hill: there've been numerous traffic calming measures that have been implemented over the last 4-5 years. Those have been remarkably helpful for people who actually live on Capitol Hill. But people who live in Upper Marlboro, Largo, Landover (and probably the suburban areas EOTR) quite rationally dislike them.

There's greater support for pro-commuter policies because the neighborhoods where many folks EOTR live are "suburban" in form. Also, they're more likely to have relatives who live in PG County. Also, they're more likely to aspire to live in PG County, so further dislike policies that adversely impact suburban commuters.

Someone who lives in Silver Spring and commutes into town daily via the Red Line is obviously more likely to support the urbanist agenda.

by oboe on Jul 20, 2011 12:14 pm • linkreport

@W Jordan:

In fact the focus on bike lanes and street cars pushed many pedestrian safety issues to the side.

I'm sure you've got some sort of plausible argument to support this, or is it just an assertion?

by oboe on Jul 20, 2011 12:16 pm • linkreport

Agree with the prior poster: Assuming that Cheh is behind the project, it is far more likely to happen than it was last week before she replaced Wells as transportation commmittee chair.

As for "priorities," I don't get the sense that anything much is an "urgent priority" anymore in the Gray Administration. A languid summer torpor seems to have descended on much of the executive branch ... starting last January!

by Bob on Jul 20, 2011 12:23 pm • linkreport

"Yes, believe it or not, transportation is not at the forefront of many DC minds. Imagine the shock and horror!!!"

That you think anyone is shocked by this Ward9YayGary attitude is what is funny.

Transport is at the forefront of alot of Ward 8 minds... just ask about the increased bus fares and rising gas prices.

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 12:36 pm • linkreport

A languid summer torpor seems to have descended on much of the executive branch ... starting last January!

But isn't that what we voted for? The big problem a lot of people had was that there was "too much change" going on. Some "languid torpor" sounds like just what the voters ordered. Things might not be very nice and there might be problems that need to be fixed, but people are used to it and like it that way and voted for a mayor who wasn't going to start disturbing the peace, as it were.

If you realize that things are the way they are because people want them that way, it all makes a lot more sense.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 12:37 pm • linkreport

While not everything has been done in Columbia Heights, a great deal of investment in road, sidewalk, and public realm improvements has been made on 14th Street. Granted that doesn't comprise all of Columbia Heights, but I don't know how many other neighborhoods in the city have a comparable great splash fountain and "community square."

I do think that this is another illustration that the city doesn't have a comprehensive livability-public realm investment policy.

Sure, DDOT has a "Complete Streets" policy and DDOT had been investing in streetscape improvements since Dan Tangherlini's time, and DDOT has articulated a livability policy in the Action Agenda the livability planning processes (which are really mostly traffic calming programs if you read the text) they have initiated (e.g., , p. ) but I don't get a sense that the city is committed to such a plan or policy.

http://ddot.dc.gov/DC/DDOT/Projects+and+Planning/Studies+and+Research/Livability+Program

It's why we need a comprehensive transpo. plan focused on mobility throughput and quality of the public realm, and again why I urged (in person and in writing) CM Wells to articulate his "livability-walkability" issues in terms of a citywide agenda.

by Richard Layman on Jul 20, 2011 12:37 pm • linkreport


I worked as a citizen vol. back in 2003 on plans to rework these and other intersections around pedestrian safety and flow. Pedestrian safety and navigation was a big element of the Columbia Heights Plan. To move these priorities forward we had to fight Tangherlini, Graham, developers and etc.. The biking community soldout the comprehensive effort for quick bike racks and lanes to nowhere. Elements of the smartgrowth community focused on developer money and political favors from Graham/Tangherhlini and who ever.

This is why except from a superficial point of view, the GGW crew avoids Columbia Heights. Implementing real policy forms and changing how people operate is hardwork. As well the people who best reflect many transportation ideals are low income and working class who had to learn to operate without cars and depend on public transportation. But this is the group that some in the GGW crew don't want to serve or be around. Even some want displaced.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 12:49 pm • linkreport

More on the languid summer torpor since January - In the One City, things are just supposed to move a little sl-o-o-o-wer. This kinda says it all, from the Examiner.

"On 198th day of his administration, Mayor Vince Gray to talk about the first 150 days -- Many newly elected executives enter office with a 100-day plan that details what they'll do in the first 100 days of being in office. D.C. Mayor Vince Gray didn't have one, and in February quipped that perhaps he should have a 200-day plan to be different.

It now seems, though, that he's decided to split the difference. On Wednesday, without ever having announced anything he'd like to get done in a certain time period before, Gray will discuss the "first 150 days accomplishments" at his weekly press conference. Wednesday is the 198th of his administration. Maybe he should have waited two days so he could go over the first 200, or done the first 150 days 48 days ago."

by Bob on Jul 20, 2011 1:07 pm • linkreport

No, I think oboe more regards you as a voter who voted not because you thought Gray would still be good at transit but because you thought that voting for Gray would finally put a stop to having DDOT deal with transit, pedestrian, and bicycle issues. In this sense, the end of the pedestrian fixes on CT Avenue is pretty much what you voted for, and, as oboe point out, the system is playing out as it should, given the election outcome.

Can your logic be any sillier? Less rational?

I'm sure oboe has no problem reiterating his point. But if he believes as you, then I can equally care less about either of your opinions.

Your silly and radical assumptions aside, my vote for Gray had very little to do w/transportation - at all. In fact, my vote for Gray had absolutely nothing to do with transportation issues as I expect him to continue these efforts at his own pace and that the city will continue to benefit for transit improvements. Maybe it's not at the speed in which you and this community mandates..but it'll happen.

Currently, the entire premise of this article is questionable. So I won't rally the troops around this article accusing DDOT of not seeing these fixes as a priority.

And thinking that I would vote "for" someone in order to stop pedestrian fixes is as silly and logic as faulty as someone thinking that those who supported Hillary Clinton ultimately wanted to end the idea that the country should elect a black man.

Yet, these are the talking points you and your fellow myops like to regurgitate. Dishonesty has never been an attractive quality but you myops think nothing of it. As a entire community, you support it. Truth be damned!

by HogWash on Jul 20, 2011 1:12 pm • linkreport

There have been cuts in the budget DC and Federal so priorities have to be made across the city. Cheh is probably the wrong person to have trying to do this, too bad for DC. Bike and pedestrian money would be the first to go since they are not a necessity in a transportation budget. Then you have to add in the ongoing projects and finish those before you can do a start up on new projects.

by Bill on Jul 20, 2011 1:13 pm • linkreport


What Richard does not get is those improvements in CH actually being implemented took actively pushing for years. Constructions on the improvements that Richard is talking about should have begun in 2005. Did not start until 2009. And where block many times by CM Graham who moved the funds, some in DDOT and developers. It was the policy top down but citizen on the ground who did the pushing. The smart growth community for most part either sat on their hands and did not want to get them dirty helping at the neighborhood level. Except to demand that DDOT put up bike racks.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 1:24 pm • linkreport

This is why except from a superficial point of view, the GGW crew avoids Columbia Heights.

Well, to be fair, there are plenty of crews operating in Columbia Heights.... and GGW just isn't up to the shooty/stabby requirements of crew registration drives.

If this were 1993 though, GGW would jump out in force. They were fierce back in the day.

But I always preferred the Shaw crews. Garfield Terrace up innit.

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 1:26 pm • linkreport

phil, really, give it a rest. It's just sad to see people come on here and gleefully ask David about his endorsement with a smug sense of superiority. You do know that if he recants, you don't win right? It doesn't change the election. It doesn't make you a better person than him. It doesn't change the fact that you're the kind of person who needs to extract a concession out of someone else, for no other reason than a petty need to compete. In fact, every time you ask him about it, you lose a little a more. With each return to that rather trivial moment you appear smaller and more embittered, cherishing each failure because they some how validate your belief that, in what was largely a 50-50 choice, you chose right and he chose wrong (something which conveniently can never be proven).

There is a point in one's life where one cares primarily about being right, and more importantly that others are wrong. They worry that with each stance they take they run the risk of appearing foolish and they rejoice when others take stances because it represents an opportunity to point out how foolish they were when things seem to go astray. I'm sure there were people who in 1862 felt the same way about those who voted for or supported Lincoln.

Thankfully for some, this all passes. People come out of that relentless place of judgement and fear and realize that it is OK to be wrong. That in the end, no one really gives a flying flip as to which CM you supported in 1998 except the two or three people, sitting in their apartments, bitter and self-devouring, who take it upon themselves to care about such things.

So you can be the kind of person who constantly points out to people their perceived failures, because, y'know they bet on a person who it turned out was flawed - instead of the other person who, if you remember, was also flawed. Or you can be the kind of person who actually does something useful. The kind of person who goes out and takes chances and stances and is wrong and fails, but who is also at times right and succeeds and (hopefully the latter more than the former - and even if David was wrong on 100% wrong on Gray, I still think he falls into the latter group) in so doing gets things done. I doubt you can be both kinds of people simultaneously.

by David C on Jul 20, 2011 1:31 pm • linkreport

Yet, these are the talking points you and your fellow myops like to regurgitate. Dishonesty has never been an attractive quality but you myops think nothing of it. As a entire community, you support it. Truth be damned!

Seriously... can you come up with any other word to describe a group of people you despire or is myops the best you got?

Do you constantly lump entire groups of people together so you can insult them?

Do you purposefully go to the group insulting route, rather than the individual one, so the trusty little "editors" of this diary do not delete your posts?

Dishonesty has never been an attractive quality but you myops think nothing of it.! How is that dishonest mayoral campaign coming? Illegally converted cash donations to mail orders? Cash buckets being passed around at cab meetings... then the taxicab commissioner is fired.

Pay to play: it's the Yay Gray way!

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 1:33 pm • linkreport


greent, I guess that's a good excuse for copping out when the rubber meets the road, so to speak. Many here are not really serious, but talk a good game. CH exposes this.

DDOT is recovering from being turned by Graham into a giant slush fund and being gimmick oriented.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 1:35 pm • linkreport

*despise

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 1:35 pm • linkreport

W. Jordan: the plans for Columbia Heights pre-date most of the people onthis blog.

How can you blame this blog for plans that were created in 2000? I think most of the "editors" were in gradeschool back then.

Seriously, GGW did not sell out Columbia Heights. on CM Graham... hell sir, we might agree on his uselessness.

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 1:40 pm • linkreport

Hogwash, we get it you think it's unbecoming for people to complain about a government decision or to in any way change the landscape to make it better. And you think this is pathetic and you voted for Gray so that this sort of thing would stop. We get it. it's your shtick. You spent a long time living in DC without complain and without trying to improve the commercial and transit landscape and you think it's a distraction when other people do it. I just disagree with you and get tired of your shtick and whining whenever people think the government should be doing something other than what it's doing. Maybe you don't like it when people petition and address their government and get done what you never in your life were able to do. But that's no reason to take it out on GGW.

I understand: your side won this round and the forces of torpor are ascendant, just like you want it. But you're wrong on this.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 1:42 pm • linkreport

whj -- I am the first to state that you know more about the ins and outs of CH than me.

However, I will say that transportation projects take a long time to come to fruition. The H Street NE Streetscape program was fast tracked (we aren't talking about the streetcar bit, which was added after the program commenced). It's taken 11 or so years for the process to "finish" since the beginning of the planning process. And that's for a fast tracked project.

Regardless of the ins and outs, given that the CH framework plan was finished in late 2004, things have moved pretty quickly, all in all, even if they aren't finished--and given that citizen action was necessary to move the public square from crushed stone to a finished project--and recognizing that city people will always let projects degrade to the mean if not pushed from outside (e.g., the attempt of Giant to put a road in the sidewalk in front of their store).

DC streetscape projects end up getting done faster than they do in many other jurisdictions, even if they aren't perfect. That being said plenty of transpo projects do languish, which illustrates why citizen involvement and attention, such as that reflected by CAPA and this blog entry, is necessary.

The thing about GGW (from observation, I am not privy to their dealings) is that what gets written comes from the people who write. If you believe that CH issues aren't covered, well, you or other people willing to write about the issues in GGW (or elsewhere) are going to have to step up.

P.S. to JustMe, thank you for the "forces of torpor" line.

by Richard Layman on Jul 20, 2011 1:55 pm • linkreport


greent, Please stop making excuses for the GGW Crew. The plans are online. I personally invited Alpert to CH to get to know what he was writing about. In terms out sellout sure some in the Smart Growth community did. They in silence allowed Donatelli Development and Graham make a mess with no accountability. Sellout yes.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 1:57 pm • linkreport

Sorry, I added wrong, it's been between 9-10 years for the start to finish of the non-streetcar portion of the H St. Streetscape project. The planning process started in 2003.

by Richard Layman on Jul 20, 2011 1:57 pm • linkreport

Thanks, Richard. I wish we could be covering every plan everywhere, but we can't. Not writing something does not mean we're trying to ignore it. If anyone is interested in writing about plans in their neighborhood or elsewhere, please email info@ggwash.org to volunteer.

by David Alpert on Jul 20, 2011 1:58 pm • linkreport

Seriously... can you come up with any other word to describe a group of people you despire or is myops the best you got?

No, myops seems like the best description.

Do you constantly lump entire groups of people together so you can insult them?

No, just this group. Much like what this community does when labeling groups who don't share their vision (in whole) as NIMBY's.

How is that dishonest mayoral campaign coming? Illegally converted cash donations to mail orders? Cash buckets being passed around at cab meetings... then the taxicab commissioner is fired.

Uhm, that has nothing to do w/me or those on this site being dishonest. I'm not dishonest. How someone ran their campaign is irrelevant to that.

JustMe Hogwash, we get it you think it's unbecoming for people to complain about a government decision or to in any way change the landscape to make it better.>

No, actually you don't get it. It doesn't matter what I tell you specifically about ME, you'll continue to masquerade me as something else. Fact, the unwarranted knee jerk reactions of the GGW community of late go waaaaaaaaay beyond simple complaints to make the DC landscape better. Instead, they border on nonsensical conclusions, assumptions and attacks on others character based off of questionable intelligence.

And you should rewrite, you get tired of me calling out the myops over their belief that their priorities fairly represents the rest of ours priorities. The facts have not supported your positions. You want the gov't to do what YOU want them to do (doesn't matter the position of others) and if not, you'll start an online campaign against them.

So no you don't understand and you are wrong - as usual. I live in DC. Not a side of DC. I hardly would consider my "side" as having "won" anything. I don't look at it in the divided way that you (and likely other myops) do.

by HogWash on Jul 20, 2011 2:43 pm • linkreport

no, myops seems like the best description.

Well, glad to see you are unable to think for yourself, and that the labelling you so despise works so well when you use it against an entire group you despise.

And as you are a participating member of this blog: you are a myopic little twit as well. Do you understand that?!?!?! When you call people myops, you are hating on yourself.

W Jordan:
greent, Please stop making excuses for the GGW Crew.
It is fitting that you wish to bash a bunch of kids - most of whom were not out of school when those plans were finalized - for the plans themselves.

Much like the dishonest mayor and his dishonest lackeys: point the finger everywhere else. GGW is not your enemy. It's a silly online diary run by a bunch of well-to-do people with "interests".

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 2:51 pm • linkreport

me calling out the myops over their belief that their priorities fairly represents the rest of ours priorities.

The above sentence refutes the below sentence

I don't look at it in the divided way that you (and likely other myops) do.

division identified

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 3:04 pm • linkreport

@Hogwash "you get tired of me calling out the myops over their belief that their priorities fairly represents the rest of ours priorities."

Where has this been asserted? Where has GGW called for the prioritization of items in contrast to the wider communities' wishes? Certainly not here, where a group of citizens organized themselves to support theses changes, and where DDOT found funding to make plans for them. They may not be your priorities, but it certainly appears to have wide public support. If not, perhaps you have evidence to the contrary.

The facts have not supported your positions. You want the gov't to do what YOU want them to do (doesn't matter the position of others) and if not, you'll start an online campaign against them.

There is little in the above statement that is true. Yes, I want government to do what I want them to do. Is that radical? Should I want them to do what I don't want them to do? Or should I want them to not do what I want them to do? That's illogical (to use your term). And at times, when government is not doing what I think they should do, yes, I will petition them. What's wrong with that? What alternative should I pursue?

by David C on Jul 20, 2011 3:06 pm • linkreport

You want the gov't to do what YOU want them to do (doesn't matter the position of others) and if not, you'll start an online campaign against them.

Yes, that is the way it works. I do want the government to do what I want them to do. That's what they're there for.

"Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus." -- how do you not understand this?

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 3:20 pm • linkreport

Once again, "One City!" baby. "One City!" all the way.

This message has been brought to you by the Committee of 100 Sarcastic Rejoinders

by John on Jul 20, 2011 3:41 pm • linkreport

@GreenAnd as you are a participating member of this blog: you are a myopic little twit as well. Do you understand that?!?!?! When you call people myops, you are hating on yourself.

No I don't. Since I don't accept myops as a valid criticism of "me," I don't consider that hating on myself.

The above sentence refutes the below sentence

You're right it does. I should clarify and state that I don't look at the election (and its potentially changing priorities) as something "I" or my side "won." But no, I'm not a myop.

@DavidC Where has this been asserted? Where has GGW called for the prioritization of items in contrast to the wider communities wishes? They may not be your priorities, but it certainly appears to have wide public support.

You're also correct. GGW has never explicitly stated that their priorities should supersede those of others - although I'm not sure if any group is "that" explicit. I think the commentary from those outside the smaller GGW community indicates that this perception is out there. It is at the heart of Milloy's "myopic twit" assertion. But no, no hard evidence to present.

Yes, I want government to do what I want them to do. Should I want them to do what I don't want them to do? Or should I want them to not do what I want them to do? That's illogical (to use your term). And at times, when government is not doing what I think they should do, yes, I will petition them. What alternative should I pursue?

As citizens we all have the right to petition on behalf of our priorities. It explains why "people" post outside the VP residence and the WH with unintelligible signs and other paraphernelia. They too are protesting their gov't based on what they truly believe. I'm not sure if everyone would agree that their advocacy doesn't hinge on the fringes.

You should continue to petitition your gov't. But, when that petition results in you (generally) advocating that citizens rise up against a chairman who decided to restructure his council, then understand that many of us will roll our eyes and consider that sort of advocacy as over the top and a bit fringy.

by HogWash on Jul 20, 2011 4:43 pm • linkreport

Hogwash, yes, we know. You're sooooo cool and mature because you're not asking the government to work for you, unlike GGW, which is no different than those cranks with signs outside the White House. You're soooo mature because you think corrupt fools like Kwame are pariseworthy in the city. Yes, it's soooo uncool to, you know, call out that BS and demand the government do what you want it to do.

I think you're so accustomed to not doing anything that you get resentful when other people do stuff and expect it to work like they want it to work. Just because you're lazy and tolerate BS doesn't mean that everyone does. You're consistent cries of "shut up! shut up! shut up!" every time someone on GGW complains about a bad move by the DC government is getting tiresome. It's kind of funny to wsee how resentful you get when someone EXPECTS the government to work for them. Maybe you're so used to being screwed over in life that you assume it's normal. Or maybe you just resent people who know what they want and get it because it shows what you could have done in life but never did.

You have low expectations. We don't. You are fine with the DC government doing stupid stuff; we aren't. You vote for incompetents and then whine that other people call them incompetent. What's wrong with you? It's like you resent other people participating in the city because they're not as complacent as you are.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 4:55 pm • linkreport

But, when that petition results in you (generally) advocating that citizens rise up against a chairman who decided to restructure his council, then understand that many of us will roll our eyes and consider that sort of advocacy as over the top and a bit fringy.

Fringy, you mean like the way that the Washington Post, the City Paper and other non-political groups like DC Urban Moms have protested this restructuring. The region's most prominent newspaper is fringy to you?

by David C on Jul 20, 2011 5:01 pm • linkreport

Can we stop this bickering? There are some interesting issues here but not about who is myopic, who hates change, etc. Please everyone make your comments about the issue in the post, not about each other.

by David Alpert on Jul 20, 2011 5:18 pm • linkreport

David, you have Hogwash chiming in with The. Same. Darn. Thing. on Every. Single. Thread. about how he thinks you're whining and wasting your and the government's time. He does this Every. Single. Time. It's not out of line to call him out on his sanctimonious BS.

by JustMe on Jul 20, 2011 5:21 pm • linkreport

No Mr. Alpert. There are interesting issues going on in a discussion as to why a person who is constantly on a blog does not think they are representative of the people on that blog. I find split personalities fascinating.

When ever Hogwash is critical of something, this blog is myops. Whenever he is in favor, this blog is not myops. And somehow, he is not a part of the blog community, though he posts here everyday.

He has a side. He chooses to say that as he has a side, we MUST also have a different side. He chooses to courtland every thread - to basically insult everyone who did not choose his new King of the City as their leader. Somehow, if you did not choose Gray, you are myops. Choices choices choices.

To have posters on your blog constantly haranguing others is something you could restrain. You choose not to. So, posters choose to deal with it.

by greent on Jul 20, 2011 5:29 pm • linkreport

Wait- are we talking just changing the timing on Walk/Don't Walk signaled crosswalks?

I think the real problems in this town (and everywhere, for that matter) are the crosswalks that aren't at signals. These ones are about as regulated as the Wild West, and therefore nearly useless.

by ed on Jul 20, 2011 6:46 pm • linkreport

Latest from CAPA:

As a result of the emails that everyone sent, I got word that, in fact, the traffic engineers had continued to work on increasing traffic light timing on Connecticut Avenue, but lines of communication had broken down. So on 7/21 the work orders will be submitted, and by the end of October, the project will be fully implemented.

And @ed, work continues on adding pedestrian signals as well, along Connecticut Ave., anyway: As for the pedestrian signals, Cleveland Park with get one in Spring 2012 between Ordway and Macomb, and DDOT will do a warrant study on Northampton in August 2011. The traffic engineers need more information than what was included in the Rock Creek West Livability Study to determine what kind of signal would best be suited for this intersection. I will keep you posted.

by TJ on Jul 20, 2011 9:58 pm • linkreport


Sure the best way to do is grade on a curve.

by W Jordan on Jul 20, 2011 11:32 pm • linkreport

So much sound and fury on what appears to have been a miscommunication between DDOT and CAPA.

by Fritz on Jul 21, 2011 9:28 am • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or