People that "care", but about different things

The issue of "seizure" of the public space on Park Road for cars rather than for pedestrians and bicyclists (note to everyone--no bike racks at the Giant Supermarket at Tivoli Square, at least not yet, but plenty of room for cars in the public space) as well as the conversation about historic preservation and designation in Brookland demonstrate how difficult it is to reach consensus on issues, when people have such widely different viewpoints on the fundamentals.

Bear with me.

For people fervently convinced that they are the kings of their property, that building permits are an unreasonable restriction on their rights as citizens, no matter of discussion reflecting a different philosophy will percolate through.

I missed last night's meeting in Brookland, and in some respects I'm glad I did, although the way it was recounted to me reminds me of exactly what happened in my neighborhood in October 22, 2001, when work I was doing was opposed and rather than oppose it on the merits--I was excoriated and the issues were obfuscated. The same thing happened last night--just to different people--and it is incredible that people who are, let's face it, lying and mendacious, get accolades for the "quality" of their research.

Ad hominem attacks and twisting facts are never signs of good arguments.

I have never really been impressed with the level of discourse on civic issues in most community meetings. I am perhaps overly fact and research driven. But in an uncertain world, facts provide some certainty, some sense of control. That factlessness seems to run amok in DC civic life is distressing to me.

I will say that's a fundamentally different issue from what is happening in Columbia Heights. But the point about different philosophies is still relevant. For people like me, urban vs. suburban design will always be the foremost and primary lens through which I view everything.

For people more focused on more convenient consumerism, without much appreciation or concern or knowledge about the principles of urban design, well, those issues don't matter. The Giant store is bigger and newer than the previous one on 14th Street, but it's not a fundamental leap forward in supermarket development, comparable to what leading edge companies such as Ukrop's, HEB Central Market (Texas), Whole Foods, and others are doing across the country.

I wrote an updated memorandum with additional arguments and photos and sent it to Giant-Stop and Shop-Ahold USA executives yesterday. I may or may not post it to the blog, but the point is that there is a great opportunity to creatively interpret even large "big box" stores such as the new Giant for the urban context.

Giant didn't do it.

But that doesn't mean that we can't approach other companies, such as Safeway, which are opening urban locations in other parts of the city.

Below are some photos from the demonstration yesterday. Click through for larger images.









No bike rack.

"Sidewalks for feet, cars in the street." From this image (not doctored--I'm not that good of a photographer) you wouldn't know that this is an urban location.

Click here for more images of supermarket-related issues.