Comments on "That's an old movie": Mayor Williams defends changing city - Greater Greater Washington

Comment by overturf

Tue, 02 Oct 2012 09:47:57 EDT

I move to re-elect Tony Williams

Comment by goldfish

Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:33:00 EDT

@WMATARage: The cities you cite have long had public transportation -- even Albuquerque (which I am very fond of despite its shortcomings).

Comment by WMATARage

Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:24:19 EDT

@Goldfish: I was never a foreign concept that city living was entirely car-dependent, a generation ago, or ever. People have always understood that in the city, there needs to be alternates to cars.

Maybe in some cities, but have you been to Los Angeles lately? Houston? Phoenix? Albuquerque?

Up until 5, maybe 10 years ago, the car was the thing, and the idea of a mass transit system other than a token bus system was a crazy dream.

Unlike some of its more northern urban compatriots (e.g., New York, Boston), DC has always seemed a little more car-centric. Wherein car ownership isn't totally discouraged by existing conditions and far too many people choose to drive. Improving Metro's got to be the first step to reversing this.

Comment by pat b

Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:13:53 EDT

younger people aren't interested in cars the way their parents were.

Comment by Tim Krepp

Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:01:17 EDT

@LuvDusty That's an old movie too.

Comment by LuvDusty

Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:56:50 EDT

Has anyone mentioned the main reason folks move to the burbs nowadays? GOOD PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

Fenty was right that we need to fix the DC public school system if we want to attract families of middle to high income to the city. Until that happens, we won't see a total shift yet.

Comment by Bob

Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:08:38 EDT

Speaking of movies, I'd like to see Mayor Williams: The Sequel. I'm tired of the old Gray film that DC seems stuck in.

Comment by Richard Layman

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 19:24:41 EDT

ceefer -- well, even PG County had a kind of quality of life bonus paid for by DC, both in terms of the city having more than its fair share of the region's poorest, plus all those DC government employees making good wages living in PG County instead of the city, people like Leslie Johnson.

But yes, HopeVI displaced a lot of people to PG County from wards 7 and 8. The Gazette ran an incredible story on this probably back in 2004, maybe 2003, two full inside pages, about the impact on PG County. I can't ever find the URL for it though--they change their indexing system often enough to make it impossible to find.

WRT the point that someone made about C100 types also being responsible for saving the qualities of the city that make it attractive to live here, I agree.

The problem is that C100 and other community advocacy groups, in particular preservation organizations, came to the fore during the period of the shrinking city, when the primary objective was stabilizing neighobrhoods and staunching the outward flow of residents mostly (but businesses too) and the decline of the quality of DC government services.

Now that the city has the opportunity to grow, these groups lack the tools and perspectives necessary for being more judicious about how to go forward, how to surgically add density, how to work to reduce car use through TDM, expanded transit, more density, more services and amenities able to survive in neighborhood commercial districts.

At the same time, the SG folks can be so pro-development and lack historical perspective and appreciation for the hard slog members of groups like C100 did for upwards of 40 years--working to keep the city and its neighborhoods viable--long before the johnny come latelies figured out it was cool to live in the city.

I am not hopeful that the various perspectives/stakeholder groups/age cohorts can come to some sort of congruency on views.

So it will continue to be contentious. And it will be interesting to see how neighborhood groups change as the demographics of membership change.

Now, I heartedly recommend that people interested go to national meetings like the National Trust for Historic Preservation in order to learn not just about preservation but about other places, urban revitalization, and other topics. But yes, things are going to change regardless, and it will be contentious while doing so.

Comment by goldfish

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:10:36 EDT

Many Committee of 100 members/supporters are fine with the way things are and do not want any change.

If that is so, may I suggest that their reasoning is examined more carefully, instead of reckoning their opposition to this or that project to a general desire for stasis?

Comment by Andrew

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:57:56 EDT

@goldfish

The Committee of 100 is partly responsible for some of the major citizen sponsored pushback that helped make the District the great city it is. As this blog notes, as great as it is, it can and should be greater. This is, in my opinion, where the divide exists. Many Committee of 100 members/supporters are fine with the way things are and do not want any change. Others, including younger residents respectfully believe that the city can evolve in a manner that protects the good.

The zoning re-write, the acceleration of the implementation of the streetcar system, the expanded bicycle infrastructure are among the many elements of this potential change.

Comment by Dane

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:28:49 EDT

Metro saved the corridors of downtown Washington that would have been sacrificed to massive parking lots if 100,000 federal workers had to drive into work every day.

Comment by drumz

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:30:08 EDT

Ceefer,

So you're line of reasoning is that as DC made itself more attractive as a place to live this has had an effect on the quality of life in PG county.

My question then is: so? What says that any particular jurisdiction has to house all of the poor people and crime? Moreover, to alleviate this problem of yours wouldn't PG county just have to respond in kind by building bike lanes and dog parks that way people from Charles county can start complaining?

Comment by goldfish

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:19:03 EDT

@Andrew: Committee of 100 and others who will oppose the zoning re-write. For them, it is all about easy and free parking, preferably in front of their houses, and auto-centric uses of roadways. Mass transit is for everyone else.

I detect a generational divide here. It seems like the younger generation, having discovered the wonders of city living, are lecturing the oldsters about it. Kinda like kids telling their parents about the wonders of sex.

I suggest that the C100 fully appreciates the need for public transportation, and how it contributes to urban living. Please remember that many of the best parts of DC that we enjoy today are due to the efforts of the C100.

Comment by David Alpert

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:36:07 EDT

Who did he insult? He said that the argument someone else made was an old one. He didn't call the person an old movie (and, while that man was of greater age than the average, he definitely was a human and not a film).

Comment by ceefer

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:18:27 EDT

"That's an old movie": Mayor Williams defends changing city
-----

Yep. That's the way to win people over. Insult them.

Meanwhile, Mayor Williams, thank you for pushing out DC's poor to Prince Georges County. We're happy with the extra crime and additiona; burdens on our social services.

Most of all, thanks for closing DC General and making Prince Georges Hospital DC's de-fact providor for DC's indigent and uninsured. PG hospital has gone broke as a result, but who cares?

We're greatful and we're here to help. So continute to "change the city". We'll be here to backfill for DC's poor while you concentrate on streetcars, dog parks, bike lanes, and density. Maybe we can get our elected officials to send DC a bill. DC can always pay us back out of their traffic camera revenue.

Comment by TM

Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:59:09 EDT

Movies? That's an old animated Gif, man. Nobody watches movies these days.

Comment by Tom Coumaris

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:00:04 EDT

You can't live where you can't get to your work. The first "suburbs" were along streetcar lines. Suburbs past streetcar lines required cars and then freeways to carry them. As freeways clogged another commuting method had to come along because under 5 mph commutes are impossible. If Metro completely closes for a day businesses and government have to effectively close because there's no capacity on the highways for everyone to commute by car.

People already commute from Frederick and Hagerstown to Shady Grove to Metro in to work. Soon they'll commute from suburbs in West Virginia to Metro in Loudoun County.

Since Metro auto congestion in DC has increased. Anyone who wants can live in car-centric suburbs and yet ride Metro to work in DC.

Metro was to facilitate commuting from further-out suburbs, the opposite of getting people to live closer to work.

Comment by Thayer-D

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:33:36 EDT

Metro also saved the city. The plans of getting all the suburbanites to their downtown jobs in cars would have destroyed the city.

Comment by Tom Coumaris

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:24:55 EDT

People moved to suburbs for many reasons- chiefly racial and social, but obtaining a car was the cost of doing so. I don't know of anyone who moved to the suburbs to keep their car, although today maybe some new hires do so.

As gas gets more expensive and congestion chokes commutes, the suburbs depend on an alternative transportation.

Metro saved the suburbs.

Comment by fongfong

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:05:21 EDT

@Andrew has hit on the main point that angers folks from the Committee of 100. For them, everyone else has meant a very specific group, one that has been a majority in our City like forever. The 1950 era zoning rules continue to assure that the 100 folks need never ever run into those other folks on public transportation, on the street or in their car-centric neighborhoods. And now, that 60 year reign of privileged alone-ness is beginning to fray. "Have accessory units in my neighborhood? I think I don't want to see those folks who might live in them."

I'm not suggesting all those in Ward 3 opposing the rewrite are like this. But those who continue to believe in a divided city for the usual reasons will take advantage of those scared (through misinformation)they'll not be able to drive their car and park right in front of Rodman's or the American City diner.

The diversity issue is one that politicians who might oppose the rewrite need to understand - keeping the 1950s rules are anti-diversity. Sad to say, that is one issue politicians in this town understand very well.

Comment by Andrew

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:44:26 EDT

@goldfish...just wait until you hear the drumbeat from the Committee of 100 and others who will oppose the zoning re-write. For them, it is all about easy and free parking, preferably in front of their houses, and auto-centric uses of roadways. Mass transit is for everyone else.

Comment by Capt. Hilts

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:47:19 EDT

With money tight, suburbs are not financially sustainable.

Urbanized communities can benefit from economies of scale that suburban communities cannot.

It's that simple.

Comment by goldfish

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:21:28 EDT

...living in urban places doesn't mean abandoning automobiles entirely, but it means having options so that one isn't entirely dependent on them or any other mode of travel. This concept, foreign a generation ago, still persists in many residents' minds.

This is dangerously close to a straw man argument.

I was never a foreign concept that city living was entirely car-dependent, a generation ago, or ever. People have always understood that in the city, there needs to be alternates to cars.

Comment by Natitude

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:23:29 EDT

Did Mayor Williams mean, "That's a clown remark, bro."

Comment by Andrew

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:11:27 EDT

I think we will see this cleave in thinking and living as we careen towards the zoning re-write process. Already, there are scores of Ward 3 residents up in arms over proposed changes to the zoning code that won't affect them in any way, shape or form. Yet, they are already contacting their councilmembers (including the Chair) and girding to do whatever they can to torpedo this multi-year process.

The fact is, when many currently over 35 turned 16, we couldn't wait to get our drivers licenses and earn enough money to buy a junker. Today, I am so incredibly impressed with the overarching return to the city, with the call for housing and transportation choices. It is the clear path to a truly sustainable future.

Comment by Thayer-D

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:51:47 EDT

I miss that guy.

Comment by Geoffrey Hatchard

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:51:16 EDT

It amazes those of us in the know, but there is a HUGE population out there that thinks like this gentleman does.

I don't know the best way to help them see that the world has changed. Should we have some kind of an "internship" or "job shadowing" program, where they spend a day or three tied to the hip of someone who lives car-free (or -lite) to show them it's possible?

Comment by David Alpert

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:39:08 EDT

I didn't know the person and didn't catch the name. It wasn't someone I know from other events, though.

Comment by spookiness

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:20:07 EDT

Wonder who the attendee was? Which reminds me, there's a certain C100 member I noticed hasn't been around these parts lately.