As “prequeled” yesterday, GM attended a brutal marathon-like ANC meeting Monday night. After a long warm-down run and a good night’s sleep, GM is now ready to give an account of the race.

Along the way, we’ll pass sewage pipes, cupcakes, and yet another rejected curb cut. Make sure to carbo load and stretch and GM will see you at the starting line after the jump:

Starting Gun – 0’0″:

The meeting started promptly at 6:30. Right off the bat, the girth of the agenda inspired many encouragements to cut to the chase, which were almost always immediately followed by long discussions cutting nowhere near the chase.

Student Detritus – 0’12″:

The first substantive presentation of the night came from a rep from Georgetown University on the question of student move-in trash removal. Apparently a garbage truck has been trolling through the West Village collecting trash from off-campus students. The rep also touted the fact that students could be fined between $125 to $300 for various violations and told residents to call 687-5138 if they have any issues with their student neighbors.

WASA Gonna Happen with Q St? – 0’41″:

As discussed before, as a result of an EPA lawsuit WASA is obliged to conduct a massive construction project on Q St. from 27th to Rock Creek (among other projects). This is to stop harmful sewage from entering our waterways, like Rock Creek and the Potomac. On Q St., WASA needs to separate out sewage pipes that deal with sanitary sewage (i.e. stuff from us) from the storm-water sewage.

To do this the contractors will need to shut down stretches of Q St. In February there were three options put forward:

1. Just shut down Q St. totally for 4-6 months
2. Keep open only one eastbound lane during the day and close it at night, total construction time 6-8 months
3. Keep one lane open during the day but allow traffic both ways with flaggers directing traffic, both lanes open at night, total construction time one year.

In his otherwise spot-on preview on Monday, GM predicted that WASA chose Option One and that they’d start in October. He was wrong on both counts. But in his defense, it was a trick question. Turns out WASA chose secret Option Four: keep two lanes of traffic open at all times. They will start in two weeks.

Here are the specific details:

• Since Q St. is essentially a three lane road (two traffic lanes and one parking lane), they will keep at least two lanes open at all times. This means they will only be doing construction on one lane at a time.
• No parking will be allowed in the affected section from 9:30 AM to 3:30 PM.
• The WASA rep estimated the construction would take 11 months, but…
• …five minutes later she said that if everything goes perfectly and no problems arise you can expect them to finish in….11 months. Oh. So expect it to be closer to 15.
• Metal plates will be used, but the contractors assured the audience that they would be firmly pinned down and asphalt ramps would be formed to dampen the noise.

Three Events, Little Controversy – 1’05″:

As the race really settled into a early pace, the ANC quickly ticked through approvals for three events that will affect Georgetown streets in the near future: The Taste of Georgetown (10/10), Komen Cancer 3 Day (10/9), and Bike DC (10/17).

The only minor issue came up when Ron Lewis reminded the BID that the Taste of Georgetown was supposed to be a charitable event and that they should endeavor to make sure there still was a “substantial” charitable donation at the end of the day.

Stopping for a Drink: 1’33″:

Last October, DC Council voted to ban the sale of small bottles (“singles”) of alcohol in Ward Two. A single is a bottle of liquor smaller than a pint and a bottle or can or beer smaller than 50 oz. ABRA has said that they will consider a waiver from the ban for any establishment that gets an ok from its ANC. As mentioned in March, the ANC and CAG was considering granting a Georgetown-wide exemption.

They have apparently backed off that position. It seems to GM that Bill Starrels never warmed up to the idea in the first place and is convinced that the singles ban has turned Key Park from a “drunkard’s paradise” (real quote) to a park with fewer “homelessly-challenged individuals” (also a real quote, although to be fair, he was trying to make a joke and it simply didn’t come out right).

Starrels and Lewis were strongly of the opinion that both the law and public opinion weighed against granting a ANC-wide waiver. Although to GM’s ears it seemed like they still talking more about the difficulty in a drink-by-drink waiver rather than a ANC-wide waiver as discussed in March. Nonetheless, it appeared to be heading to a conclusion before Charlie Eason spoke up and said that he’s heard complaints against the ban and that he thinks a ANC-wide waiver is still worth pursuing. To be continued…

Along the same lines, it appears that Johnny Rockets will get its liquor license approved. They apparently simply want to offer a couple beers and wine to avoid the “veto factor” wherein the dad forces the family to eat elsewhere because he just really wants his booze. Commissioner Skelsey was particularly worried about Johnny Rockets losing its atmosphere with the introduction of alcoholic drinks. GM is convinced that it must be the case that you have to be a parent before you could ever believe that Johnny Rockets has atmosphere, let alone worry about its future.

Hitting the Wall – 2’09″:

Every runner knows the feeling of having a great race and then hitting the wall with just a little too much of the race left to run. That is about the same feeling GM felt before they even got done with page one of the agenda.

Thankfully he could zone out during the talk of the expansion of the Washington International School (not in his jurisdiction) and skip right to the Old Georgetown Board matters.

Chez Mama Gone, Hello J Chocolatier – 2’46″

Despite fooling a certain other neighborhood blogger, Chez Mama San has been closed for a while. The owner would like to re-open the space as “J Chocolatier” and sell various chocolate goods. On the second floor will apparently be a separate art gallery called “Gallerie Chez M”.

Getting a Second, Cupcake-Fueled, Wind – 2’58″

As mentioned in yesterday’s prequel, Georgetown Cupcake unveiled their design for the erstwhile Starbucks location at 3301 M St.:

Let’s just say there weren’t lines forming around the block to compliment this design. Resident architect Bill Skelsey was particularly down on the design, but attributed it mostly to the ugly building they’re starting off with. GM agrees. The building is dreadful and this design makes it look more like a cookie-cutter mall chain store than a flagship store. The cupcakes are good, but GM also thinks that a good chunk of Georgetown Cupcake’s success has been built on its brand (cute, upscale, preppy, etc.). This building will not do its brand any favors.

Moving into the old Philadelphia Cheesesteak Factory space would have made a lot more sense.

The Painful Finish – 3’40″

After a blur of OGB projects that even a neighborhood blogger couldn’t find interest in, the ANC came to its final item: a curb cut application. This was actually the most interesting curb cut applications GM’s seen due to the fact that the architect found historical photos demonstrating that there was a curb cut even back in the 19th century.

No use though. The ANC still rejected the request and the poor owners ended up running a marathon for nothing.

Now make sure to run a cool down run and to stretch…

First of all you should take note that the meeting is next Monday, which is still March. It’s not clear why they had to make like a Blue Moon and meet twice in March, but c’est la ANC.

One potential scene of fireworks is the return of the residents of the house on 32nd and S St. asking once again for a curb cut. They seemed rather surprised not to get the ANC’s approval last month (or rather, earlier this month). While GM’s made his case against curb cuts, he’s certainly sympathetic with the residents for being misled by their realtor into thinking they could park off the alleyway when they bought the house. Moreover, they’ve got signatures from a bunch of neighbors consenting to the curb-cut. GM is still generally opposed curb-cuts and believes that a household with a one-to-one ratio of adults to automobiles shouldn’t act like they’re doing us all a favor by reducing their “footprint” to one reserved space directly in front of their house. That said, this wouldn’t be the absolute worst curb-cut in the world, so GM is officially indifferent to the ANC’s decision. (Besides, the curb-cut itself is technically in Burleith, so it’s outside GM’s jurisdiction anyway…)

Beyond curb cuts, it seems like the month of signs. Check out how many places are coming in for sign approval:

• Basil Thai Restaurant
• Katten Muchin Rossenman law firm
• Bodega restaurant (the old “Manhattans”)
• Vivvy’s Nails
• Reiss London
• Yiro
• Jan’s
• Fringe
• Julep

Was there some anti-sign regulation passed recently that is forcing all these places in for a variance? It doesn’t seem to have to do with DDOT’s anti-street sign campaign; these all seem to be affixed to the building.

Anyway, that’s about it. It’ll be a long, boring, endless night. Hopefully next month (or is it next-next month?) there’ll be some more sparks.

On Monday night, the ANC rejected a request by the residents of 1724 35th st. to establish a curb cut on S st. to allow them to build a two car garage on the back of their home. The Commission expressed concerns about the effect the move would have on parking and stated their general distaste for such curb-cuts. While the ANC made the right choice by rejecting the curb cut, it did so for only partially the right reasons. Find out why after the jump:

Parking:

It’s no secret that parking is a huge issue in Georgetown (although, less so for us over in the northern East Village). When you allow a curb cut and a garage, you are taking away a parking spot from the “pool” so to speak. The owners inevitably argue that you’re also taking a car off the road too. But in effect you’re not taking a car off the road as much as simply guaranteeing a parking spot directly in front of the owner’s house. From an equitable point of view, that’s somewhat indefensible.

Beauty:

Curb cuts are simply ugly and inconsistent with our neighborhood form. They turn a sidewalk into a driveway. As a result they are dangerous and make a sidewalk (the place pedestrians should feel the most secure) feel unsafe. GM has had plenty of occassions where he’s been walking on the sidewalk and came across a car trying to exit or enter its garage, and had to stop short waiting to make sure the driver saw him. Sure they’ve never hit him, but so what? It’s still an unecessary danger for the pedestrian, especially considering that it only exists to benefit the homeowner. And that’s not even mentioning those inconsiderate homeowners who park their cars across the sidewalk. That’s downright rude, not to mention callous of people who can’t or shouldn’t step out into the road, like children or certain handicapped individuals.

Traffic:

Ok so they’re anti-social, what else is wrong with them? Well consider this: right now it’s a pain in the ass to own a car in Georgetown, particularly in the West Village. It’s even more of a pain in the ass to own two. You’ve got to constantly struggle to find a spot on the street to store that car, particularly if you drive it every day. In fact, it’s probably such a pain in the ass that a certain amount of people choose not to own a car or two. Or if they own one, they may not drive it as much as they otherwise might.

Guaranteeing storage changes that equation. Allowing residents to build a two car garage virtually guarantees that they and all future residents of that house will, in fact, own two cars. When you lower the natural disincentive to own and drive a car what do you get? Driving. Lots of it.

Now plenty of people will argue that the traffic back-ups in Georgetown are mostly caused by non-residents. And they’re right. But Georgetown residents contribute to that. And if we were to start allowing more and more “easy parking” it would cause more and more Georgetowners to own cars or own second cars and start taking more discretionary trips. This would increase the congestion and unpleasantness of the neighborhood.

So yes, the ANC was right to say that allowing a curb cut unfairly alters the parking equation, but they still don’t seem to see that parking is only part of the problem. Safety, beauty, and traffic are as much if not more at stake with curb cuts.

The New Social Safeway

As described earlier, the Social Safeway as it currently exists isn’t long for this world. They have put forward a dramatic new design whereby the whole building will be moved up to front Wisconsin. However, Safeway plans to keep the same ingress and egress. DDOT may have something to say about that though. Will there be one or two driveways for Social Safeway, Mark II? More after the jump:

As covered in depth over at GGW, DDOT has adopted a progressive stance towards curb cuts, which are where a driveway crosses a sidewalk. As seen below, Safeway currently has two curb cuts:

Curb cuts in red

Generally speaking, curb cuts are not desirable. They are dangerous because they involve drivers and pedestrians sharing the same space, frequently without any crossing lights. Moreover, they are unsightly and contribute to a sense that “this space is for cars, not people”.

For these reasons, DDOT has taken a newly critical view of curb cuts. As GGW reported, whenever a building is renovated, the landowner needs to reapply to DDOT to maintain any existing curb cuts.

GM supports DDOT’s approach to curb cuts. Many curb cuts proliferated in our city under administrations that were not particularly sensitive to what goes into good urban design. To the extent that construction like Safeway’s offers DDOT a chance to approach the issue anew, it’s wise to take that opportunity since it likely won’t come again for decades.

So that said, should DDOT push a one driveway solution on Safeway? At Tuesday’s ANC meeting, Safeway representatives came to request ANC support in keeping both driveways notwithstanding DDOT’s new approach. Not terribly surprisingly, the ANC passed a motion unanimously in Safeway’s favor.

In GM’s opinion, to simply keep the two driveways as is would be a lost opportunity. The current situation is not preferable. The south driveway is governed by a traffic light that allows only a few cars out at a time (that is unless cars stopped going north of Wisconsin aren’t blocking the exit). The brick wall lining the sidewalk seriously limits visibility for both drivers and pedestrians and there is no signal specifically alerting pedestrians that the cars leaving Safeway have the green light.

The north exit is not much better. The visibility problems continue. Further, there is no traffic signal so most of the time it is only useful for drivers heading north on Wisconsin.

For these reasons, neither of these exits could serve all drivers: taking a left from the north exit is difficult and the south exit would get backed up if it were the only way out.

Keeping the current two exits (with some improvements to visibility) is only really an adequate solution. A complete reengineering of the way traffic flows through Wisconsin, Safeway, and 34th St. is necessary. Ultimately, a well designed traffic system could support a single exit for Safeway (and thus a single undesirable curb cut). Just look at Whole Foods. while it may get backed up a bit more than Safeway, the overall traffic flow is well designed and in the meantime only one curb cut is necessary For that reason, GM recommends that if DDOT does insist on a single curb cut for Safeway that the move be part of a radical redesign of the traffic flow for that intersection. If no radical changes are in the offing, then two exits ought to remain.

One last thought: would it be completely impossible for traffic to be directed behind the British School to Whitehaven? It seems that that would be legally and logistically difficult, but would it be impossible?