Monday, December 15, 2008

Public Space Hearing for Maryland Ave Gas Station

Announcement [this project is brought to you by my good friend John Ray who opposed on the various Florida Market projects, and who also fronted the slot machine effort]. Clearly he knows what's best for our neighborhood...or maybe his pocketbook. Please do attend the meeting, and feel free to contact your Councilmember Tommy Wells with support for, or opposition to, the project. The more educated input the better-

I want to invite anyone who can to come to a public space committee hearing Thursday. The goal is to impress upon the Public Space Committee, through sheer numbers, that there are a lot of residents opposed to giving 7,240 square feet of PUBLIC space to a gas station so its owner can supersize it. A gas station of this magnitude is projected to generate 2,600 crossings (that's number of car trips across the sidewalk) and will be the 3rd gas station in a 3-block
radius (and the 12th in a 1-mile radius). Plus, I think we can all agree there are about 1,000 things we would rather see that much public space devoted to--public art, green space, a plaza, anything. Besides, a gas station is just out of place on that corner.

We're looking for as many people to just SHOW UP against it. There's no need to say anything (maybe your name, but that's it). We're just trying to show that people are against giving so much public space to a gas station. 15 would be great. Dozens would knock their socks
off. As many people as we can get would be great.

Anyone and everyone should come to:

What: Public Space Committee Meeting
Date: Dec. 18th, 2008 (Thursday)
Time: 1 p.m.
Place: 941 North Capitol Street, NE, 7th floor (North Capitol
between H and K Street; follow the signs to the Alcohol Beverage
Control Board hearing room)

64 comments:

Unknown said...

Long live the gas station.

Anonymous said...

1 pm on a workday?

Anonymous said...

Elise,

Any idea if the Council is accepting testimony for the public record? If so, is there a submission deadline?

Anonymous said...

Houston, we have a formatting problem.

Anonymous said...

Re: formatting problem, no kidding. Only about 50% of that notice was readable.

Is there an alternate URL for this somewhere?

Thanks much.

Anonymous said...

EDIT: I overstated the problem. It's only the tail end of each line, and it's decipherable, I guess. I posted before without making the effort. Bad me.

Anonymous said...

Re: Formatting.

There is this really sophisticated technique called 'cutting and pasting'. Give it a try some time. ;)

<><><><><><><><><><>
Announcement [this project is brought to you by my good friend John Ray who opposed on the various Florida Market projects, and who also fronted the slot machine effort]. Clearly he knows what's best for our neighborhood...or maybe his pocketbook. Please do attend the meeting, and feel free to contact your Councilmember Tommy Wells with support for, or opposition to, the project. The more educated input the better-

I want to invite anyone who can to come to a public space committee
hearing Thursday. The goal is to impress upon the Public Space
Committee, through sheer numbers, that there are a lot of residents
opposed to giving 7,240 square feet of PUBLIC space to a gas station
so its owner can supersize it. A gas station of this magnitude is
projected to generate 2,600 crossings (that's number of car trips
across the sidewalk) and will be the 3rd gas station in a 3-block
radius (and the 12th in a 1-mile radius). Plus, I think we can all
agree there are about 1,000 things we would rather see that much
public space devoted to--public art, green space, a plaza, anything.
Besides, a gas station is just out of place on that corner.

We're looking for as many people to just SHOW UP against it. There's
no need to say anything (maybe your name, but that's it). We're just
trying to show that people are against giving so much public space to
a gas station. 15 would be great. Dozens would knock their socks
of. As many people as we can get would be great.

Anyone and everyone should come to:

What: Public Space Committee Meeting
Date: Dec. 18th, 2008 (Thursday)
Time: 1 p.m.
Place: 941 North Capitol Street, NE, 7th floor (North Capitol
between H and K Street; follow the signs to the Alcohol Beverage
Control Board hearing room)

Nicola Hayes-Allen said...

Elise, I have a Dr's appointment in Georgetown at 1.15 pm. I'm going to try and postpone it, so I can be at the meeting.

Thanks for letting us all know about it.

Anonymous said...

This just shows how much we rely on your (usually) impeccable formatting for all of our local news, Elise!

inked said...

Sorry, it was lazy cutting and pasting on my part. I didn't remove the pre. Finally fixed.

John said...

Hi Elise -

Please let me (and other readers) know whether I can send an e-mail in regarding this public hearing. I am in New Zealand, will not be able to make the meeting, but would still like my viewpoint to be heard. Thanks,

John

Anonymous said...

Viva Gas Station!!!!

-Robby

inked said...

Hey guys, I just reposted the announcement [but the note above the dash is mine]. I have no idea if they will take emailed, or supplied statements. You can, if you live in his SMD, contact the impacted ANC Bill Schulteiss.

Anonymous said...

Also, please let’s not attack John Ray. He served the District well on the Council for 18 years.

If you want to learn more about him go here, http://www.manatt.com/Attorneys.aspx?id=125

But just as people here insulted my Council Member Harry Thomas, Jr., and I took issue with that, I take issue with attacking Mr. Ray for representing his clients well.

I don't know if it's racism or something else, but why Mr. Ray is singled out among a sea of others in his field is stupefying to me. He’s a lobbyist and a lawyer. He’s doing what they do professionally, and my hat goes off to him for his skill and ability to do it very well.

And by the way since all the gas stations in Trinidad are owned by one man, and he always has higher prices, a little nearby competition that isn't a cash only station would be welcomed.

-Robby

Anonymous said...

"I don't know if it's racism or something else, but why Mr. Ray is singled out among a sea of others in his field is stupefying to me."

Yes, even that unreconstructed racist at the WaPo Colbert King has lit into Ray for being your classic grafting lobbyist.

Oh, how much bile and innuendo can a lobbyist take? Let's break out the world's tiniest violin, play the world's saddest song, and find out. It's *got* to be The Racism, though.

Unknown said...

Well, I seems you don't have a firm grip of the English language. But hey that's your problem.

After 18 years of service, a put down by Coby King is a stripe of honor.

Lets stop attacking Mr. Ray. He's doing his job. Now I'm off to dinner.

Anonymous said...

Robby,

Your ignorance is priceless.

Thanks for keeping the blog entertaining.

Unknown said...

Again with the insults. But not substance. If you have issues with the development then have them, but less move away from personal and professional attacks.

I support a gas station, I want easier access to cheaper gas.

-Robby

Wells said...

The idea that this is public space is a bit of a misnomer. If this is public land, then so is the Argonaut's patio and parking spaces. Where is the protest to turn the Argonaut's "Public Space" into a green space? Also, if the cutback from Maryland Ave is public space, then I am sure that all of the home owners with "shell no" signs in the windows would not mind if I had some friends over for a BBQ on the public space in front of their houses.

Anonymous said...

The Argonaut has to PAY to use this space!! Not only that but, had to SHELL OUT a ton of money to repair and repave the area in order to use it.

It is my understanding that gas stations are exempt from having to pay to use public space.

Hillman said...

I'd be surprised if gas stations are exempt from paying for public space if other businesses have to.

But let's be honest here. This isn't about paying for public space.

It's about people not wanting a gas station at that location.

Which is fine. But at least be honest about it.

I've got mixed feelings here.

We'd all love a nice restaurant or such there.

But this is someone's personal property we are trying to dictate uses on. It's their income we are messing with.

I've got some problems with that.

And if this gas station is blocked, which it probably will be, I don't want to EVER hear a neighborhood resident complain about the high prices and crappy conditions (including crime) at the BP stations nearby. If you kill the competition you don't then get to complain about the status quo.

Anonymous said...

Where is the protest to turn the Argonaut's "Public Space" into a green space?

Right, because if a community agrees to allow one business to set up a sidewalk cafe, thereby increasing the value of the neighborhood, the community must also subsidize another business to burn tires in a big smoky heap, thereby choking the air with plumes of acrid smoke.

Anything less would be hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

wells,

those are incredibly bad arguments. the whole idea here is that public space is for the benefit of the adjacent landowner AND the public, not solely the adjacent landowner to the detriment of and against the will of nearby residents. so your argonaut example is terribly flawed since a vast majority of residents approve of argonaut's use of this public space. the gas station, as evidenced by all the petition signers, not so much. so on the one hand, you do have to be sensitive to the needs of the adjacent landowner, but you do not have to go along with whatever that landowner wants to do. particularly when practically everyone living around the site is against the proposed usage.

and hillman, you make many one-sided assumptions in your post. i wonder why. the most glaring one - that this gas station would not also have crappy conditions and attract crime - is a huge leap. for goodness sake, the guy is putting in a 24 hour bullet proof glass mini mart. yeah, those establishments don't typically attract crime and cause problems for nearby residents, right? i would love to hear your thoughts on this if you actually lived within eyesite of this joint.

this gas station/kwiki mart will be yet one more site mpd will have to monitor 24/7, similar to the 7/11 on 7th and maryland. further diverting mpd resources. the harm here far outweighs the benefits. just a terrible idea all around.

Unknown said...

email comments to:

matthew.marcou@dc.gov
catrina.felder@dc.gov

They will not have to pay rent on the use of public space - this type of use is not classified as one that pays rent.

Use of public space should have public support as it was intended for the enjoyment of both the private and public owner.

It is outrageous that Shell can double the size of "their" operating lot at no cost. They can afford to purchase a larger property elsewhere to fit 8 fuel pumps.

This project contributes nothing to H Street and in fact will discourage further investment on the 1400 block of H. How many folks think that block is resurgent with destinations? It not a coincidence that investment is going to 1200 and 1300 blocks. A gas station will further hinder this revitalization.

Bill Schultheiss

Hillman said...

"and hillman, you make many one-sided assumptions in your post. i wonder why"

See, now, this is the bullshit that H Street is becoming famous for.

I have a different opinion, and suddenly my motives are questioned.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but are only those that 'live within eyesight' qualified to have opinions?

And not that it really matters, but I never said I favor a gas station there. I just pointed out some points of view that seem to be overlooked.

Hillman said...

Wasn't this site once used as a gas station?

I'll admit I'm not overly familiar with it's uses and history, but if I remember from the last time this came up, wasn't this at one time a gas station, then a 'used car lot' (which probably did little but store cars and trade in paper tags)?

If it was previously used as a gas station I think we are hard-pressed to say that's not a reasonable use going forward, even if we don't like it.

Are there any actual public safety issues involved?

Because the 'public space' issue is weak. Every single inch of land in most of our front yards, and in front of most businesses, is 'public space'. Calling it 'public' doesn't mean we all have a right to dictate it's use, absent any public safety issues.

If we do, then

Businesses get public space use waivers all the time. It's not like it's some extraordinary freebie this guy is asking for.

But maybe my biggest concern is that we are being asked to support a cause that we haven't really been told much about.

That's not the way you should interact with a neighborhood - by inflaming passions but not providing background, detail, etc.

For instance, how may people have actually seen the site plans, or have been told what's actually planned, or been kept up to date on discussions / negotiations with the property owner?

If you are going to try to take someone's livelihood away from them and severely limit the use of their property (which you didn't pay for) the least you can do is present all the facts.

Anonymous said...

If you are going to try to take someone's livelihood away from them and severely limit the use of their property (which you didn't pay for)...

Saying we're "going to try to take someone's livelihood away from them" is a bit purple, otherwise surely you won't mind if I start a lead-smelting business in my back yard?

Welcome to civilized society.

Hillman said...

"Saying we're "going to try to take someone's livelihood away from them" is a bit purple, otherwise surely you won't mind if I start a lead-smelting business in my back yard?"

If your back yard was zoned for that or had a history of that use and I moved next door after that had been it's history, then I'd be unhappy about it but I wouldn't think I had a right to stop you.

But, again, we are operating without the full facts.

This site operated as a gas station, with C of 0s for gas stations in 1969 and 1977.

Way before most of us lived here.

Funny how so far no one has bothered to mention this.

I don't know this owner's history. Maybe he tried to run a decent gas station but because of the riots and decades of out-of-control crime he had to discontinue it's use.

Should he now be punished for that?

I dare say none of us would have been brave enough to try to maintain a gas station (then a mostly cash business) at 1400 Maryland Avenue in the 70s and 80s.

Maybe he's a total loser and has no respect for neighbors.

I don't know. Recent history of the lot seems to indicate that a bare minimum the people he rented the land to are bad neighbors.

But I don't know how much control he has over that.

But what happened in years past? Is the current owner the same guy that owned it when it was a gas station?

That, again, is my biggest difficulty here. We're being given a very inflammatory story which is short on facts and history.

That's not really how a neighborhood blog should work, especially if it's run by an ANC rep.

Anonymous said...

Wow, never thought I'd agree whole heartedly with Hillman but I do, and he's right. But, since I live in the "bad" nearby neighborhood, I guess it's okay that we keep the BPs and crime.

God forbid, that any effort of any magnitude, be made to make life better for those of us in the BP neighborhood.

But I've stopped expecting fair minded honest debate or even concern.

This is a big NIMBY thing. In Trinidad we will keep the BP's the hookers, and the drug dealers, You all down there below Florida get to keep cafe's and green spaces.

Isn’t it odd the more comments have been exchanged about this one Shell thing then about things that matter, like that kid that was killed by those other kids this summer up in Trinidad.

I watch what’s commented on, and well the life of people where I live must be at an extreme discount. I guess human life and public safety are not as important as a gas station.


I guess it's God's divine plan.

-Robby

Anonymous said...

Hillman -- There is tons of information available to the public on this, including the site plans. You can't fairly claim that opponents haven't made their argument. Perhaps you haven't seen the website? http://shell-no.com/

Also, the idea that something "once was" a gas station and therefore should be again is a pretty thin argument.

At the same moment in history that this was a gas station, they were still bulldozing neighborhoods and kicking out poor people to build highways. Cars were king. City planners were fools. People loved gas stations. Times change.

A gas station is simply not a good use of that space, and as long as the public has a say, we should say so.

I admit the public space law is weird, but it is the law we have. It's one of the reasons I can't put a parking spot in my front yard and neither can you. Would I like one? Sure. But I knew the rules when I bought the place, and so did this owner.

Finally, Robby, I'm not sure where the chip on your shoulder comes from. But I hope it is one day removed. Aside from maybe a few neanderthals, no one here writes off your neighborhood or thinks hookers, drugs, and BPs are fine to stick there. If you had a plan of action to improve your neighborhood, I'm sure you'd find many allies here. But I don't see why your strategy is to wish a gas station on everyone, if what you're really upset about is your own.

Also, the idea that people care more about a gas station than a fallen child is outrageous and offensive to me. What is there to debate in blog comments about that terrible tragedy? Of course I care about that kid and was sickened for his family. But there's not a "debate" to have in the same way there is a debate over a gas station. That's why there are more comments.

I think you're seeing the neighborhood and this blog through hate-colored glasses. Take them off when you can, and you'll see most people aren't so bad.

Anonymous said...

Way before most of us lived here.

Begging the question. Things like zoning are merely a reflection of agreed upon community values. But that's exactly what's under discussion. Most of us don't care how things were done in the "good old days."

Isn’t it odd the more comments have been exchanged about this one Shell thing then about things that matter, like that kid that was killed by those other kids this summer up in Trinidad.

You can probably chalk that up to ageism; clearly folks around here don't care about young kids being killed. Otherwise we'd have 100+ comments on some variation of "Man this is unspeakably tragic and senseless."

I guess the only other explanation is that kids being shot to death *is* actually unspeakably tragic and senseless, and that folks actually feel like they can do something about the recidivist crapification of the neighborhood.

Anonymous said...

Just for the record, in the 70s, it was Scott's gas station. Gas stations were much smaller (fewer pumps), and didn't have quick marts in those days.

Hillman said...

Rick:

Actually, I have been to the Shell No website.

Nowhere on there does it mention that this site was ever a gas station in the past.

That's a fairly significant detail to not mention.

And that has never, to my knowledge, been mentioned on this blog (I could be wrong about that).

And actual info about any communications the property owner has had in years past with the neighborhood, any stipulations with current/past leases regarding control over conditions at the property (a legitimate neighborhood concern), etc..... all that info is missing from the Shell No website and this blog.

The 'site plan' on the Shell No website isn't detailed, doesn't include info on the proposed lighting, minimart, etc.

The history of the property site is relevant.

Why?

Because we as a society allowed this neighborhood to degenerate into an unbelievably violent world where decent businesses couldn't hope to survive.

I personally think we owe it to those that were driven out of business, to be given the benefit of the doubt now that times are better.

Now that we've gotten all fancy-pants, with our H Street Overlays and our dreams of high-end pet treat shops and apparently a restaurant on every single commercial lot, we seem to have forgotten that a lot of decent businesses went out of business not because they were bad people, but because residential neighbors robbed them blind for decades.

I think we owe those business people something. Their city failed them miserably. Then, decades later, we change the rules and add 'overlays' and other

That's sortof the problem I have with our new goals for the area. Yes, it's great to try to guide development for the neighborhood as a whole.

But it makes me a bit uneasy when we begin rezoning things to be Ye Olde Charming and we forget that some businesses really suffered through decades of hell in this town.

Again, I got no idea if the current owner owned the site way back then or not. That's another factor that would weigh into the fairness of this matter.

But things like history matter, even when it means we may not get our uber-fashionable garden center or our latest theme restaurant.

Again, it's the lack of information that troubles me here. We are asked to assume a whole lot, with a whole lot of somebody else's money at stake.

Anonymous said...

Joe Englert said:

I have been told that in the 70's the second floor of what is now the Argonaut was a brothel.

Does this mean we can revert back to the old use just like the new shell is trying to do?

Hillman said...

Joe:

The obvious difference here is that prostitution is illegal, and gas stations aren't.

I'm hoping you have a stronger argument than that.

Hillman said...

But, yes, I'd argue that if the Argo was once approved for prostitution, then by all means argue for a prostitution license again.

Unknown said...

Rick Rick Rick.


"I think you're seeing the neighborhood and this blog through hate-colored glasses. "

No I see it clearly for what it is. I see that while endless efforts are put into shell no hardly any efforts besides MPD fronted activities are put into working toward sustainable peace.

I just with the passion shown here would be shown towards Trinidad, Rosedale, etc. The creativity, the organization and the will to see value in an ugly strip of land could be put to better use if it was towards people instead of a patch of land. People should matter more than a gas station.

" If you had a plan of action to improve your neighborhood, I'm sure you'd find many allies here. But I don't see why your strategy is to wish a gas station on everyone, if what you're really upset about is your own"

We've met with the owner of the BP station, He and I exchanged e-mails earlier this month. He's made some improvements, but there's more to do.
I don't have a chip, but I am bothered by the belief that development that isn't cute and Paris like is somehow bad. I would like to not have to drive a long distance to fill my car up with gas at a reasonable rate. It matters to me and to all that drive, and it matters more to those on tighter incomes.


"Also, the idea that people care more about a gas station than a fallen child is outrageous and offensive to me."

What was there to debate about a menu or photos of a store burning down or half the other things posted here. Yet many of those non debatable positions garnered more attention than anything life or death related. Sometimes the attitude was that people up here get what they get, other insinuated that the child was prob a drug dealer. It's funny looking back at the wild postings this summer. When real issues were discussed it always bordered on race tainted vile remarks.

So what's more outrageous and offensive a gas station, or a child being shot dead. Why does one get a website, yard signs massive community action, and the other get scorn. It's save our plot vs he must have been a dealer.

Blaming a child for being out with his parents wile visiting his dying grandmother is outrageous and offensive. Wanting cheaper gas is rational and the American way.

"I think you're seeing the neighborhood and this blog through hate-colored glasses. Take them off when you can, and you'll see most people aren't so bad."

Not hate colored, I see them as what they are. I don't assume the best from people, or the worst. I judge things as they come and I don't give anyone the benefit of the doubt. Frankly, no one is worth it.

At our core we are self serving. Economists stumbled upon this years ago. We are transactional by nature, and even being selfless has an intrinsic benefit. So no people are not bad, but you're not good.

As stated in Into the Woods, "You're not good, you're not bad, you're just nice"


I can not pretend that the world is new just when people someone says it is.

We are debating a gas station, and I am worried about what fresh new hell the spring and summer will bring. My priorities are a little different. Not better, but different. But no one wants to really address crime reduction. And yes, I tried for six months and watched a working group dwindle down to 1 person.

This is just NIMBY pablum to me.

John said...

Hi all - I'm surprised that nobody brought up the legitimate public health concerns around gas stations, in general. This isn't a NIMBY issue. Gas stations are characterised by volatile organic carbons - some of which are cancer-inducing. Is this really the sort of business that is good for the community. Many of us probably do not even own a car. If we do, it is not likely that we use it for our commute. The gas station will likely be a benefit for commuters from outside of the DC metropolitan area, but at a cost to those who live in the neighborhood. There really are better uses for the space. There may not be many better commercial uses, but there are likley to be uses with broader public benefits. I think that is what people are hoping for. Anyway, the gasoline automobile has a short-lived future, right? ;-)

Anonymous said...

Heelman,
This is not the poor poor owner of the former gas station. This is the owner of 30 gas stations.But then you knew that didn't you?

Hillman said...

Actually, Anon, according to the Shell No website the person being leased the land has multiple Shell stations.

The actual land owner? They have nothing to say about his wealth, or lack thereof.

In fact, they have almost no information about him.

Hillman said...

At the risk of overkill (ok, more overkill), I'm not arguing in favor of a gas station. There may be very legitimate reasons why a large gas station wouldn't work there.

But expressing shock and horror over the use of public space on an already-paved corner isn't one of them.

I'm just concerned about the process we are following here..... the whipping up of emotion without background or fact provided. It troubles me, especially if we plan on using this model to question businesses going forward.

Unknown said...

John Gas prices were cut in half, so no cars are not going anywhere anytime soon, we'll just get cars that sip gas for the summer months. However the less affluent, will get today's cars tomorrow, and they will need gas and they live in Trinidad, Langston, Carver, Rosedale, and etc.

The idea that only commuters drive is really false. Recently all of the Gas stations in SW waterfront and, and and the SW Navy yard area closed all of them. Commuters are not that impacted, but people who live there have to travel great distances for gas.

Here's a news flash, people in DC do drive. I know in some utopia where things magically appear, or everything is in walking distance, or the new motorcar is power by sunshine and smiles, but that's not reality. Some of us have to drive, and some of us like to.

Gas stations have to go somewhere. Trinidad has two, with all its development, H now has none. Carver has two, Langston has one.

Of those five four are owned by the same person, His prices are higher than most other gas stations in the city. So the gas nearby is high, it seems like poor people are being gouged. So why not some competition, why not better pricing.

To ignore the reality of the local driver displays the type of arrogant detachment that continues to be problematic for the environmental movement. It's just being dictatorial with the earth in mind, not actually listening to the concerns of real people.

To know that gas is needed, there is a market for it, and to seek to incubate a commercial development not near public transportation that the hipsters want to take, as there is nothing wrong with the X2 except that is a regular bus, and god forbid the new discoverers of the neighbor have to ride a real bus to get here. Since all that is true and people drive here, and park here, why not let them fuel on H as well?

Anything short of that is NIMBY. And for one I am tired of being the back of the house, the industrial part that helps H run.

"Gas stations are characterized by volatile organic carbons - some of which are cancer-inducing."

So the kids, that live near Maryland Ave are worth more than the kids on Holbrook and Morse?

Because if what you say you also believe, then why not get the BP's shut down too? But no, they are not hill people, they are the wrong class, race, economic level. They don't count, only the Maryland Ave folks count. The poor people, they can get cancer. Statistically they will die of it or diabetics, or get shot anyway so why does it matter. I've not once seen a Close BP movement.

That's beyond NIMBY, its incendiary economic and environmental bias.

I wish we would be honest, there are legitimate reasons to oppose this Gas Station, but they are not the lofty high minded reasons set fourth. They are concrete reasons, some are small minded, but I wish we would stop trying to tie this to either theoretical public space issues or the environment. Both being fake or at least minor issues. People don't want it for the same reason they don't like Checkers, it ugly and isn't in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, It will be a bright annoying thing at the bottom of an otherwise nice well appointed corridor.

It's NIMBY, NIMBY has value, but it is NIMBY.

And it doesn't matter what moral argument you try to wrap it in, it reveals itself like the emperor w/o clothes.

-Robby

Anonymous said...

Robby, Robby, Robby. :)

I actually enjoyed your response quite a bit. I find many of your comments here quite disruptive, but it's clear your heart is in the right place. I think we might actually get along if we knew each other.

Here's the thing. I think most people that come to this blog really want the community to improve, for everyone. Better businesses, yes. But better schools and less crime, too.

Bill S. for example is not only leading the push against the gas station but is working with the city on upgrading the Rosedale Rec Center (and encouraging otherpeople who live west of 15th St to care about it.)

There are a certain number of cretins who troll here with comments like "the kid was probably a dealer who deserved it." They make me want to vomit too. Frankly, if I were Inked I would delete them.

But I don't think comments like "you people are racists who don't care when black people die" are really much different or any better.

We can have a better dialogue than that.

Cheers, man. And if you do have ideas on tamping down youth violence, I hope Inked will post them. If people thought it would actually make a difference and that their participation was welcomed, I'd hope you'd get a good response.

Anonymous said...

Robby,

If I understand you correctly, your argument is that:

1. people in the District do drive, need cars, etc.;

2. that being the case, it's reasonable to want gas stations nearby and with decent prices;

3. yes, there are gas stations nearby, but with lousy prices because of a lack of competition (as nearly all are owned by the same vendor).

I hope I've got your argument right. If so, as always speaking only for myself, trust me, I'm aware of the fact that people in the District drive. I'm one of them. But I don't understand the argument about availability/price of gas. You note, for instance, that there are a fair number of gas stations nearby. You say that's irrelevant because their prices are lousy, because most are owned by the same person and there's no competition. Maybe so, but I get gas quite frequently at the Hess at Sixth and Florida, near the Florida Avenue Market; it has some of the cheapest prices I've seen anywhere in any part of D.C. That's five-to-ten blocks away for a Trinidad resident; is that too far to have to travel to get gas? There's absurdly cheap gas very nearby.

Whether I agree with your argument or not, though, you were doing fine until you said "why not get the BP's shut down too? But no, they are not hill people, they are the wrong class, race, economic level. They don't count, only the Maryland Ave folks count. The poor people, they can get cancer. Statistically they will die of it or diabetics, or get shot anyway so why does it matter. I've not once seen a Close BP movement." Inclusion of ad hominem like that devalues the rest of your post. If you have some concrete evidence -- say, some quotes, or writings, or explicit actions -- indicating that the folks opposed to the Shell station `don't care about poor people because they'll get shot anyway,' then please post links to it. Otherwise, you're giving opinions as fact while making hateful public accusations about other people's behavior without any factual basis whatsoever. That's just wrong.

The analogy between efforts to stop the Shell station from opening and hypothetical efforts to shut down the BP is an imperfect one, because it's a different matter entirely to try to fight a place before it opens than to close it after it's been open for years. But going ahead with that analogy anyway, and speaking only for myself (but I suspect this reason is true for a lot of people here), I'll tell you why I haven't been aggressively arguing that BP should be closed: because BP hasn't affected my life negatively enough to provoke me, and because nobody whose life *is* badly affected by it has ever made an effort to communicate to me why BP is so incredibly awful for them that I should act about it even though it doesn't affect my own life that much. That's not a race or a class thing; it's an "only so many hours in the day" thing. I could sit here for an hour and list issues and causes that I think deserve more attention -- hell, just more contemplation even -- than I give them, and I'm sure you could too about your own life. It's not at all uncommon, and it's neither racist nor classist, for people to pay the most attention to the things that directly affect them or that they think will directly affect them.

Oh, and as far as the comparison with Checkers, that's a gross generalization. I'm not a fan of the gas station proposal, but I don't mind Checkers. Well, I wouldn't mind it if it hadn't been boarded up for most of the last year, and if half the people who eat there didn't throw their empty bags and cups from Checkers out their car window onto my street. But the last point isn't Checkers' fault, but rather the fault of dumbass customers who don't see littering as a bad thing. Heck, as fast food goes, I like Checkers' food.

John said...

Robby,

I agree with Chris. Your comments often appear to be divisive and not well constructed. I don't live along Maryland Avenue - I live in Carver Terrace. So don't continue to operate under the assumption that people in the greater H Street area draw the same arbitrary boundaries that you do.

By the way, the ";-)" symbol that I added to my last e-mail was supposed to flag to the reader that I realise that the gasoline automobile is actually NOT going to be phased out soon. You missed the clue. Still, I don't think it is a big ask that people drive a couple extra blocks to the next cheapest gas station.

I will continue to be one of the "hipsters" that takes public transportation, because I can't afford to buy a car.

Anonymous said...

Since I commented about Checkers being boarded up, I should note that I drove past Checkers just today, and the boards were being pulled down and glass going in. Good deal.

8th and El said...

Meeting was postponed till later in the day. They had some other properties to discuss on the hearing, including an office space on Mass (they were discussing that when I got there.) and a new Hilton(? I looked over someone's shoulder to see their plans. I think it was a Hilton, but it certainly was a hotel.) it seemed, and they had to push back the time on the property in question. The moderator apologized for the inconvenience, but I don't think I will make the effort to go back out there.

Anonymous said...

John :

Wow. Not sure where to begin. But I will just say I respectfully disagree with you. I didn't miss the clue – but thank you for the condescending insult - I just found a fallacy in your point, which is still present. As for your opinion of my comments as "divisive and not well constructed" well that seemed to be a personal attack and I am not going to address the personal aspects of that here.

Over the last months, while you've been out of the country, I have worked tirelessly to coordinate community involvement in PSA 504. I've been attached my ANC Commissioners, people in the administration and even citizens that did not want change.

It was thankless and very hard work. I am capable of thinking, and my arguments are not divisive and poorly constructed, they are real and clear. My voice, not matter how much you may want to attack me, will not be silenced. Sometimes in life you have to tell the truth, and that's what I do. If that's offensive then that's offensive. People were offended by the fact the that the earth revolves around the sun too.

But I will not follow your lead, when you lived here I considered you a friend. No matter what you say to or about me. No matter how you insult me, or belittle me or my opinion, or my right to have and express my opinion, I will not return the favor.

My positions stand. We need competition. We need as much effort that has gone into this opposition to go in to building sustainable change in the community.

I will never apologize for standing up for the little guy, the kid that is beating the odds and doing well. I will not stop reminding people here that H, and the surrounding area was not some brave new world that they discover and is theirs to conquer and reform.

If that's unwelcomed, then it is so. But it is the truth. When black men and woman stood up and demanded there rights that too was divisive. When women demanded the right to vote that was divisive. When the Pan Indian movement took hold that was divisive. As was the workers movements, and the Latino rights movements.

The question is divisive to who?

To those movements it was called progress. It pushed this country's growing edges and made it better.

I will not betray my heritage, by not speaking out. Even if it earns me insults stabs in the dark by people I call friend. We've come to far and it's been too long.




Chris:


Here’s the logic, John was saying that the station would lead to cancer, if that is so. If he and other’s believed that, then why not work to shut them all down save for the ones in non residential areas. A failure to do so would be akin to saying that the people near the current stations are not worthy of protecting from cancer. That would be a disgusting value judgment about the value of the lives of the people.

The reality is that there is a greater cancer risk from sitting in traffic than there would be from the MD Ave Gas station, to put of a cancer scare is dangerous and wholly dishonest.

But assuming it was valid, why not then work to protect all people. The absence of that, the sin of omission was very pronounced and very telling

“It's not at all uncommon, and it's neither racist nor classist, for people to pay the most attention to the things that directly affect them or that they think will directly affect them.”

I agree, however it is myopic and NIMBY.

On checkers, I don’t mind it either, but I hear tons of people complain about it.


Rick: Thank you for the kind words. I am around so if you ever want to meet for a beer, you can contact me I think my e-mail is on here. I care a lot about the community, and I want every one to be happy, but that sometimes means trying to get people to focus beyond the things that directly affect them and to in turn focus on a broader array of issues. I support this gas station because I think competition would improve service in the area. I also would support a high end liquor store because it may improve the quality of the other liquor stores around here through competition. I am a sorta free market social reformer.


-Robby

Anonymous said...

Sorry to hear that 8th, this happens time to time. I am sure both the for and against side will be well represented.

-Robby

Anonymous said...

Robby -- I agree with you that the "the Shell station will cause cancer" argument isn't that great. There may be good arguments for not having the gas station there, but that isn't one of them, IMHO.

On the other hand, I disagree with you that focussing on those issues that most directly affect oneself is "myopic and NIMBY". I would argue that more or less everyone does this naturally; and so using those adjectives to describe that parsing of time and mindshare renders those adjectives meaningless. It's like calling something purple in a world where every single thing is purple -- it's completely meaningless, unless your adjective is meant to refer to *shades* of purple. How much effort do you put into raising awareness about child prostitution in Thailand and the Phillipines? Prison rape? Holocaust denial? Age discrimination? Teen drinking? Food inspection and safety? Does it make *you* myopic that you put more thought and effort into addressing crime and violence in our society and your neighborhood than any of these other things? Of course it doesn't.

Anonymous said...

Robby,

Did you just equate your crusade on this blog to support the gas station owner (the "little guy") with 30 gas stations in the DC metro area to the civil rights movement? Did you? Wow...

Anonymous said...

Robby said:

"I care a lot about the community, and I want every one to be happy, but that sometimes means trying to get people to focus beyond the things that directly affect them and to in turn focus on a broader array of issues."

So, in other words, you want us to all be happy, but only if we care about the same issues you care about and in the same order of priority. Got it ;)

Anonymous said...

If you're against this proposed gas station, you're a racist; if you're not outspoken enough about existing gas stations, you are also a racist.

Surely we owe the heroes of the Pan-Indian movement no less than our most eloquent sophistry. Heh.

Anonymous said...

Chris:

Point taken, I disagree, I want both. I want Shell No, and Kids Yes, I don't really care how the gas station turns out beyond my individual need for access to cheaper gas, but when I see all the effort being put in to one small issue and the sea of other issues, many you named getting no attention, well it bothers me.


The other people:

No I didn't call the gas guy a little guy.


I want people to not just focus on development stuff but to focus on the lives of real people in need.

To me IMHO, a gas station is far below public safety and education, and Access to decent health care.

I know it may sound silly, but people first then gas.

IBC, love the root beer, but you statments are not my statments. But do what you do.


-Robby

Hillman said...

"Did you just equate your crusade on this blog to support the gas station owner (the "little guy") with 30 gas stations in the DC metro area to the civil rights movement?"

Once again, the developer has 30 gas stations.

The developer is NOT the property owner.

Anonymous said...

Robby -- you wrote

but when I see all the effort being put in to one small issue and the sea of other issues, many you named getting no attention, well it bothers me.

I think it's important to remember that this is the Internet, and the Internet is not reality. I'm betting that outside a few people, "all the effort being put into one small issue" isn't really much effort.

For instance, from the facts that I'm against the gas station going in + I've posted a few times in this discussion, one might conclude that this is an issue that means a lot to me for some reason, and that I've put a lot of effort into it. Well, here's how much effort I've put into this issue: at the H Street Festival, there was a table with a petition, and I signed it. That's it. That's the sum total of my practical involvement in this issue. There are other issues that matter more to me, and so they get more of my mindshare and my time. It's not like I've put a ton of time into this issue, time that could have been spent saving children's lives. And I suspect the same is true of most people in the area.

So I claim that although lots of people may be opposed to the Shell station at that corner, the majority are not shovelling huge amounts of time/effort into that opposition. Why might it seem otherwise here? Well, the nature of Internet discourse, especially when negative insinuations are made about people's motives or subconscious reasons for taking a position, can cause people to get defensive and stick up for that position with energy disproportionate to how much it actually occupies their real life thoughts. I wasn't really planning on particpating in this discussion at all, because while I'm opposed to the gas station going in, it's not *that* enormous a deal to me. I think it'd be bad; but there are other things that matter to me even more. So I wasn't going to post . . .until I read your post suggesting that folks opposed to the gas station going in are simply classist. That didn't seem fair, so I replied. So now I'm a few posts in, and I probably seem like someone who cares about the gas station project a whole huge lot; but that's wrong. It's just the Internet.

This is yet another reason why I really wouldn't draw any dire conclusions from the "attention" this issue is getting.

John said...

Hello again. I owe ROBBY a huge aplogy. He and I cleared things up offline, but it doesn't hurt to provide a more public apology, given that my comments upset him.

One thing I really enjoy about reading this blog is that there are always a set of varied opinions. Despite active debate and occasional smart-assed comments, I hope that wouldn't break us apart as a community. In many ways, we all want to make the community better, adn we all can provide valuable contributions to that.

To everyone, happy holidays!

Unknown said...

I owe John one as well, he cares greatly about all people in the region. And If my words inferred other wise that was a gross mischaracterization of a man I consider a friend and am very fond of. In any event. I've started my feelings.


Chris you're right, I get spun up on things here because its some darn hard to get people engaged. I wish the effort, the yard signs the since of solidarity around this issue real or just superficial was put toward other issues that have deep and greater impacts.

I am not belittling the cause, I just feel its like talking about the types of clocks in a hospital when we should be talking about the water supply going to the hospital.

-Robby

inked said...

Hillman,
I wrote the part about John Ray at the top. The note at the top clearly indicates that the rest of the post is an announcement written by someone other than me.

Unknown said...

John Ray is a good man, I reminded of that when I visited the Wilson (District) Building last night. As mentioned he served this city for years, and was and advocate for all of it's people.

I really don't like smart when inked or others attack some one who is considered by many to be one of modern DC greatest political leaders.

"Clearly he knows what's best for our neighborhood...or maybe his pocketbook." was really just a mean and pointless thing to say.

I've expressed this to Inked in person so it is no surprise that I say this here.

John Ray served us well. Personal and professional attacks on him or his character really are not cool. Regardless if you were successful in the hearing or not.

-Robby

Hillman said...

Inked:

Your pointed commentary on the posting itself and your past comments on the subject would strongly indicate that you were in fact strongly against this gas station, and aligned with the Shell No folks.

You were acting as an advocate for a point of view, and you made your blog available as a conduit for that, and you made your point of view well known.

So, yes, you do have a responsibility as an ANC rep to be more forthcoming on things like this.

inked said...

Hillman,
this isn't even in my Ward, let alone my ANC. I'm not an elected official over there.

Anonymous said...

Robby,
John Ray ran for Mayor 4 times and lost. His service on the city council was lack luster at best. His own habits (clients)make him appear to available for sale to the highest bidder. Maybe you are mixing him up with John Wilson or David Clarke.

Unknown said...

Yes, perhaps your right, I never studied DC History and have no knowledge of public administration or local government management. Iam sure you know best.

Thank you