If there’s one constant among DC neighborhood activists and officials, it’s that everybody complains about DDOT. Part of this is inherent in being the transportation agency: as Chris Ziemann said at Wednesday’s Dupont ANC meeting, everyone is a consumer of DDOT’s product, the streets.

But there’s more to it. DDOT also suffers from little coordination in its policy approaches or its procedures. They’re fairly good at fixing potholes, reconstructing streets and building bridges, but it’s a jumble of people and projects going their own directions.

DDOT could do better in two areas: policy and process. On the policy front, we need an overall coherence to what DDOT builds. Is it a general goal to speed traffic or give more street space to transit and pedestrians? Should we make one-way streets into two-way or two-way streets into one-way? Are bulb-outs a good idea or not? When are bike lanes appropriate?

We should have a citywide set of “street best practices” which show the ideal street. Small residential side streets would have certain ideal characteristics, major downtown streets other characteristics. And then, when considering a specific street, planners would start from a common set of elements and a common language, making modifications as appropriate for the particular conditions of that street and the wishes of the residents.

The other deficiency is process. In the last six months, DDOT has reached out to the Dupont community concerning 14th Street, 15th Street, 17th Street, 18th Street, and U Street. Some of these projects are “studies” and some are “designs”. Some, like 17th Street, had an extensive process of public meetings; others, like 18th, were already partly designed before the community got involved. Some Each project has featured a different set of contractors following a different process and focusing on different elements.

DDOT doesn’t even have a master list on its site of street reconstructions under consideration, nor a calendar showing when they are scheduled to be done. Plans are all over the place on their Web site, like here, here, here, here, and here.

I’ve learned from good managers in the private sector that it’s always best to communicate as much as possible clearly to your customers. Communicate the status of each project and the schedule. If a schedule has to change, communicate that and explain why. In DDOT, some people communicate well and others poorly, but there is no coherent management.

DDOT should revamp their site to organize studies and information based on criteria useful to its customers, such as geography. There should be a page for each neighborhood or ward showing projects, studies, and designs in that area, maybe even with a map. Along with the list should be a calendar showing what year each project is expected to receive funding. And clear contact information should accompany each item.

DDOT gets a fair amount done, in a city where there is a lot to do. But it’s so focused on getting things done that it’s falling down at organizing and communicating its many projects. We need good management at the top to impose clarity and coordination. The Office of Planning has made huge strides in this area under Harriet Tregoning. We need a similar leader at DDOT.

David Alpert created Greater Greater Washington in 2008 and was its executive director until 2020. He formerly worked in tech and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco Bay, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He lives with his wife and two children in Dupont Circle.