darren says: (1/13/12 9:00 AM)
Hello,

I am an employee at one of the large employers in the neighborhood, though my comments are solely my own, and have been commuting in/out of here for nearly four years. I attended last night's meeting, and was struck by the degree to which bicyclists and area residents should be natural allies in this study. (judging solely from last night, we currently aren't, but here's why we should be).

As one of the many additional people streaming into and out of this neighborhood every day, the last thing I want to do is add an additional tailpipe to your air, an additional car in your spot, an additional horn to your ears, and an additional bumper to hit things with. But most of my coworkers are happy to do just that, and sometimes so am I. Why? Because while it may seem congested to you, it seems just fine for us.

You might have guessed, I want more and better bicycle and pedestrian facilities, I want lanes taken away on M Street and South Cap, and I want to be able to cross under the SE/SW Freeway without fear. But rather than oppose those things, I hope area residents will consider a trade-off -- make their neighborhood a utopia for bicycling and walking, and in turn, demand and hold accountable developers and employers to make sure they're doing EVERYTHING and then some to make sure the trips they generate are not adding tailpipes and horns to your streets. Take a look at what my employer is doing to reduce car trips in and out of your neighborhood, and then demand that they quadruple their efforts, because judging from your comments last night, they obviously haven't done enough.

We can help you preserve your neighborhood. You can help us prevent more tragedies on M St (such as that which killed one of my sorely-missed colleagues). Support us in providing real facilities that encourage us and our families and coworkers to walk, bike, and use transit. We'll support you in preserving your residential parking, preventing cut-through traffic, and channeling commuters to the freeways. I'll turn myself inside-out encouraging my coworkers to transport themselves to work in ways that are less impactful to the neighborhood. And none of us will simply accept that when a new employer comes to town, all of it's employees should be allowed to just hop in their cars and drive to work. Let's demand that the businesses in the area get serious about cutting the number of cars coming to their properties. How about it?

Westnorth says: (1/16/12 2:53 PM)
WashCycle's Friday blog post also noticed that the "one woman who is particularly anti-bike" is one and the same from last time. It's unfair to other stakeholders (and I noted this to DDOT staff at the meeting) to let a few people dominate the discussion, and set a negative and combative tone, with harangues and complaints (in many cases about things that don't have anything to do with the plan's scope) before the group as a whole has a chance to ask questions about the plan and simultaneously share their thoughts -- which was the point of the tables with maps in the back.

That said, I thought that DDOT's presentation was too technical and didn't do a good job of conveying the scope of the plan, how the plan differs from previous plans, or whether DDOT has done any sort of background research on the corridor. I understand that this was an initial meeting, but some very basic facts about the corridor (this many people live here, work here, these are the assets and how many people they move, how many they could move, these are some of the ways people get around) might have set the tone a bit better than a few people weeping and wailing about the Eleventh Commandment ("thou shalt have free reserved parking spaces for thy multiple automobiles directly in front of thy home").