Category: District of Columbia

Ft. Totten: More Than a Transfer Point

Ft. Totten: More Than a Transfer Point

On Saturday, June 15, 2013, the Coalition for Smarter Growth concluded our spring Walking Tours & Forums Series to discuss recent developments in “Ft. Totten: More than a Transfer Point”. We were joined by speakers from the DC Office of Planning, WMATA, DC Department of Transportation, JBG, and the Lamond-Riggs Citizens Association. Thanks for the great photos go to our Virginia Field Fellow, James Schroll.

Testimony before the WMATA 2025 Special Committee in Support of the WMATA Momentum Plan

The Coalition for Smarter Growth is the leading organization in the Washington D.C. region dedicated to making the case for smart growth. Our mission is to promote walkable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities, and the land use and transportation policies and investments needed to make those communities flourish.

Having helped win remarkably strong regional consensus for transit-oriented development as the framework for regional growth — reflected in the Region Forward and Economy Forward vision plans of the Council of Governments, and in the priorities of local leaders — the Coalition for Smarter Growth views investment in the Next Generation of Transit as a top priority and essential for supporting this regional vision.

We view the Momentum plan as the vision and framework for setting regional transit investment priorities and for working with all of our jurisdictions to create an expanded, well-maintained, and seamlessly integrated transit system our region needs to remain healthy, prosperous, efficient and competitive.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth is fully committed to achieving the Next Generation of Transit, as reflected in our report earlier this year. Key components include:

  • Rehabilitating and improving our Metrorail system as the region’s top priority investment;
  • Ensuring high-capacity public transportation networks to support a sustainable region of livable, walkable centers, and neighborhoods;
  • Expanding and improving the bus system by adding more service and providing bus priority on roadways is critical to meeting growing ridership demand and using our roads more efficiently;
  • Seamlessly integrating, physically and operationally, Metrorail, new priority corridor networks, bus rapid transit, light rail, streetcars, commuter rail and our bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure.

The Momentum Strategic Plan effectively makes the case for the value of the Metro system to our region and of reinvesting and strategically expanding the system. We believe that WMATA, through an extensive consultation process with COG and the jurisdictions, is the best entity for leading the strategic planning for our region’s Next Generation of Transit.

Perhaps no statistic stands out in the Momentum plan more than the value of investing in 8-car trains, which provide 35% more capacity-equal to 35,000 more passengers per hour to jobs downtown. To achieve this with roads, we would need 16-18 new lanes of highways. For comparison, widening just 2.5 miles of I-95 recently cost state and federal taxpayers $261 million or $52 million per lane mile.

Other statistics that we find compelling are that:

  • Regional riders will save an additional $100 million per year by purchasing less fuel and other out-of-pocket travel costs.
  • The region will avoid building 30,000 new parking spaces, saving $675 million.

Investing in Metro is the most critical step in supporting compact, efficient transit-oriented development, lowering per capita infrastructure costs and saving land.

If we are to continue our regional success and grow without reaching total traffic gridlock, we must rehabilitate Metro, maximize the capacity of the existing system and strategically expand Metro and connecting transit services. This must be our top priority.

Thank you.

Stewart Schwartz
Executive Director

Redeveloping McMillan is the only way to save it

At a recent public hearing, neighbors of McMillan Sand Filtration Site renewed calls to make it a park. But the only way that can happen is by developing part of it as a neighborhood, and it’s up to the DC Council to make it happen.


Rendering of the future McMillan Park.

Residents filled a June 6 public hearing held by the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development to oppose plans to sell the derelict 25-acre site to Vision McMillan Partners, who will build homes, shops, offices and a park there. But others, including Councilmember Kenyan McDuffieand groups like the Coalition for Smarter Growth say it’s the best way to bring McMillan back to life.

It would be prohibitively expensive just to make McMillan a park. Since the underground cells are made of unreinforced concrete, they would have to be demolished and rebuilt just to make them safe to enter. Allowing some private development will give the neighborhood new amenities while paying to keep the best of what’s already there.

Plan preserves historic structures while creating new park

VMP’s plan preserves all 24 of the plant’s above-ground structures, including the vine-covered sand silos visible from North Capitol Street, along with 2 of the below-ground filtration cells. 2/3 of the site will remain open space, while the southern third will become an 8-acre public park with a pool, recreation center, and a community center with meeting rooms and an art gallery. VMP promises that this will be “one of the largest and best-designed public park spaces in the District.”


Proposed site plan of McMillan redevelopment.

The historic buildings will become part of a new neighborhood with about 800 apartments and townhomes, half of which will be set aside for families making between 50 and 80% of the area’s median income. There will also be street-level, neighborhood-serving retail anchored by a 50,000-square-foot, full-service grocery store. Along Michigan Avenue, there will be taller office buildings with a medical focus, taking advantage of proximity to Washington Hospital Center across the street.

To make this happen, however, the DC Council must decide this fall whether to declare the land as surplus and “dispose” of it. They can do this either by selling it to VMP or granting it as-is to VMP under existing zoning, which wouldn’t allow major redevelopment to occur. They could also divide the property and sell off the parts to different owners and under different zoning. They can do all of this in a single set of hearings and votes, and they should to ensure that this process happens as quickly and fairly as possible.


This rendering shows how new and old buildings will coexist at McMillan.

Throughout the summer and fall, the council will hold separate public hearings on whether to surplus McMillan and the details of VMP’s plan. Meanwhile, the DC Historic Preservation Review Board is reviewing VMP’s plan to redevelop the site with housing, shops, offices and an 8-acre park and will hold hearings about it this month and in September. They’ve already offered comments about the proposal and will make their recommendations before the end of the year.

Plan will improve stormwater collection, traffic

Groups like Friends of McMillan Park and the DC Chapter of the Sierra Club argued that McMillan is already a public space and should become a public park. However, one DMPED official I spoke to after the hearing said that the city can’t afford to do the work necessary to make the site safe for public occupancy. If the District retains ownership, the site would most likely remain decrepit and fenced off indefinitely.


All 24 of the site’s historic above-ground structures will be preserved.

Opponents maintain that the site’s underground cells are needed to retain stormwater, mitigating the effects of frequent floods in Bloomingdale, which is downstream from McMillan. But DC Water already plans to replace two of the cells with water storage tanks, which will remain after redevelopment. Meanwhile, VMP has also promised to incorporate stormwater retention and buffers into the buildings and landscaping on the site, reducing stormwater runoff.

Another top complaint was traffic. Residents feel that the neighborhood’s roads are already quite congested, especially at rush hour, and could not handle the extra trips generated by a major office, retail and residential center on the McMillan site. There is no question that the Washington Hospital Center, the city’s largest non-government employer, needs better public transportation service, as it is not located near a Metro station.


Buildings will step down moving south from Michigan Avenue.

VMP plans to build a bus turnaround for shuttles between McMillan and the Brookland Metrorail station, which would operate until a planned streetcar line along Michigan Avenue is built. Moreover, North Capitol Street has been designated a Bus Priority Corridor, meaning that the city intends to make changes to the street design and traffic flows to permit faster and more frequent bus service. The development would also open new through streets across the McMillan site, improving traffic flow and connections within the larger neighborhood.

Ward 5 needs parks, but it needs housing too

Some opponents say that new development should happen elsewhere in Ward 5, like on vacant and abandoned lots along North Capitol Street or Rhode Island Avenue. While not enough resources have been dedicated to encouraging more infill development, there’s no reason why that can’t happen in combination with the redevelopment of McMillan.


Rendering of the completed McMillan Park.

It is true that Ward 5 needs more and higher-quality parks, recreation facilities, and community centers. But the surrounding neighborhoods and the city as a whole are growing and are need more affordable housing, as well as more diverse shopping and entertainment opportunities within walking or biking distance or a short transit ride.

VMP’s current plan reflects the input of community members gathered over the course of several design charrettes that were open to the public. It satisfies the need for several types of amenities in this part of the city in a balanced way. It combines buildings that are in keeping with the surrounding neighborhoods with a large park, and preserves some of the historic filtration cells and all of the silos and brick regulator houses.

We have an opportunity to transform a decrepit former public works site that has been fenced off for over 70 years into a citywide destination: a vibrant and attractive new place to live, work, shop and play that serves many of the needs of residents in this part of DC while incorporating many reminders of its unique history. The Council shouldn’t waste any time taking advantage of it, as an opportunity like this won’t come again soon.

If you’d like to tell DMPED and the Council to surplus McMillan and allow VMP’s plan to happen, you can contact them here. Comments must be received by June 20.

All images courtesy of VMP.

Click here to read the original story>>

Capital Bikeshare becoming an economic development tool

Capital Bikeshare is doing more than moving people around on red bikes. It’s also helping sell houses and apartments and draw people to businesses.

The bike-sharing system, which has more than 175 docking stations across the District, Arlington and Alexandria, has become the latest tool to spur development and attract young people. Soon it will be coming to Montgomery County, and other communities are trying to bring it to their neighborhoods.

Craigslist showed 72 active housing listings touting proximity to bikeshare on Friday. It is featured on Airbnb as a perk for visiting tourists seeking to rent out locals’ homes. Wal-Mart is planning to add the docking stations to its stores coming to the District, according to bikeshare officials.

About eight in 10 bikeshare members who responded to an annual survey said they are more likely to patronize a business if it is accessible by bikeshare. Those riders are a coveted demographic. They tend to be higher educated, wealthier and younger — plus more likely to be male and white — than the general population. Stewart Schwartz, who runs the Coalition for Smarter Growth, noted the service attracts new and young residents who are looking for walkable places to live and work. They are likely to be innovators who will help spur the economy, he said.

Arlington County has viewed bikeshare as a economic development tool from the start, according to Chris Hamilton, who runs Arlington County commuter services. He said retailers, restaurants and shop owners want to be near the docking stations. “I think it’s helping our local economy,” he said.

The bikeshare stations were not always so coveted, though. A few years ago, neighbors near Lincoln Park in Capitol Hill fought against a docking station near them. But now, officials said, some developers are seeking them out.

Christopher Leinberger, a George Washington University professor and Brookings Institution fellow, said that Capital Bikeshare could become akin to cars and Metro in changing the dynamics of development around the region. Leinberger has studied the economic impact of Metrorail, which has spurred billions of dollars of development around the region in the past 37 years. “It could be that significant and yet it’s really cheap,” he said.

But bikeshare does not have the stability of Metro stations, noted Matt Klein, president of D.C. developer Akridge. Bikeshare docks are solar-powered, which has made them easy to install without needing to wire into the power grid. But that same ease of installation makes them easy to take away. By contrast, fixed rail Metro stations provide a predictable and unmovable piece of transportation infrastructure that can transport far more people than a 40-bike docking station, he said. Developers can build around a Metro station confident it will likely attract a permanent and steady flow of people.

Still, Klein said bikeshare is nice to have near Akridge projects. “It would fall more into an amenity category than important transportation infrastructure,” he said. “It may evolve into something more.”

Photo Courtesy of The Examiner

Click here to read the original story>>

14th Street: Past, Present, and Future

14th Street: Past, Present, and Future

The Greater U Street area of 14th Street NW has witnessed dramatic change in just a few short years. Over 1000 housing units are under construction or newly built, about 85,000 square feet of retail space have been added, and dozens of restaurants have opened in the past few years. What makes this historic district such a magnet for new development? How has historic preservation and the arts district coexisted with dramatic redevelopment all along the corridor? What’s being done to preserve and build affordable housing? We heard about the story of the rapidly changing 14th Street NW corridor from the people who live and work here.

Testimony before the Hon. Muriel Bowser, Chair of the Committee on Economic Development and Housing re: FY 2014 Budget Oversight for DMPED and DHCD

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. We are a regional organization based in the District of Columbia focused on ensuring transportation and development decisions are made with genuine community involvement and accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

DMPED should recommit to leveraging public land dispositions for affordable housing

We are greatly disappointed in DMPED’s reduced expectations for affordable housing in new public land dispositions. Given the increasing challenge of housing affordable to our residents, we urge the Council to ensure DMPED recommit to leveraging public land dispositions for affordable housing, including for very low income households. In our 2012 report, Public Land for Public Good, we show that the District has and can do great things with its city-owned land. We are disappointed that DMPED is departing from the practice of the past decade to ask for 20-30 percent of affordable housing in public land dispositions affordable to households earning 30%, 50%, 60% and 80% Area Median Income (AMI). We are also surprised that the Mayor’s Housing Task Force dropped any recommendation to make the most of public land sales for affordable housing and sent this issue to the future study list.

Under DMPED’s current leadership, commitment to affordable housing in solicitations for public land dispositions has steeply declined. DMPED no longer asks for a specific percent of affordable housing or specific income levels. Instead, DMPED asks that proposals comply with or exceed the Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) law, which is already required for most residential development. IZ sets a minimum of 8-10 set aside at 50-80% AMI, with most income targeting at 80% AMI. To compensate, developments receive a 20% bonus density. Given the city can (and used to) leverage the value of its own land to subsidize housing, we should expect much more from public land deals. We recommend that DMPED restore the earlier practice of to asking for a 20-30% set aside with income targeting at the 30% AMI, 60% AMI and no more than 80% AMI income levels. (See tables 1 & 2 below).

This drop off in affordable housing in public land dispositions as a priority is particularly surprising given the attention the administration has put on renewing efforts to preserve and create more affordable housing. Public lands are an important tool for creating new affordable housing that the administration should not abandon now. We ask the council to ensure we are making the most of the unique opportunity to leverage the value of the District’s land to create more affordable housing through the public land disposition process. Public land disposition and development requests should clearly ask for and prioritize proposals that offer substantial amounts of affordable housing, including units affordable to those earning 30 percent AMI. As was the practice in the past, we ask that requests specify the city is seeking 20 percent to 30 percent of the total number of residential units affordable at 30 percent and 60 percent AMI for rentals, and up to 80 percent AMI for ownership. We suggest table 2, below, as a model. In addition, we ask that DMPED better coordinate with other agencies to pool resources to ensure the production of housing affordable at deeply affordable levels as a part of larger mixed income or all affordable development.

DHCD – support $100 million to affordable housing, ensure IZ & ADUs have support they need

Regarding DHCD’s budget, first and foremost, we want to express our support for the $100 million commitment to affordable housing, with $87 million going to the Housing Production Trust Fund. We commend the Mayor for this commitment and ask the Council to support this. These funds are critically important to addressing our city’s escalating housing prices that are burdening a large share of D.C. households with higher and higher housing costs.

Inclusionary Zoning & affordable dwelling unit management

IZ administration has experienced significant problems in the start up phase. DHCD has indicated that is making headway addressing these significant challenges. DHCD will propose revisions to overly cumbersome administrative regulations, which should improve the process. DHCD has worked with Office of Planning and the Zoning Commission to resolve conflicts with FHA mortgage lending standards. DHCD has solicited for additional assistance to implement IZ and Affordable Dwelling Unit (ADU) programs. These are all important steps to addressing the major administrative challenges IZ implementation has encountered. We remain concerned that the office responsible for administering IZ and ADUs is understaffed. We suggest that at a minimum, and new Capital City Fellow be added to their small team.

I want to thank Director Michael Kelly and his staff for their openness and responsiveness to us.

Thanks also to Chairman Bowser’s keen interest in ensure these programs work, and affordable housing opportunities are increased.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Cort
Policy Director

Table 1
Table 2

How to fix parking: Price it right, and don’t play favorites

Parking has been called third rail of local politics, and for good reason. At a panel Wednesday on “Getting Parking Right,” Nelson\Nygaard transportation planner Jeff Tumlin put it this way: “People hate the existing system, but they’ll also hate any changes you make to the rules. No matter what you do, people are going to be very upset with you.” Sam Zimbabwe, planning director for the District Department of Transportation, was also on the panel. From the look on his face, he knows that has his work cut out for him as the agency tries to bring some measure of rationality to the city’s tangle of parking regulations. We all want to be able to park wherever we want, for as long as we want, and we want it to be free. But we might as well wish for a world of free and infinitely available ice cream. We can’t have it, and we give up a lot by trying to get there.

Sustainable transportation consultant Jeff Tumlin presented in Richmond and DC

I missed both presentations earlier this week by Jeff Tumlin, one of the nation’s leading sustainable transportation planners as a consultant at Nelson-Nygaard, and author of Sustainable Transportation Planning: Tools for Creating Vibrant, Healthy, and Resilient Communities. On Monday, he presented to the Partnership for Smart Growth in Richmond, to about 80 attendees, including a couple of City Council members and the city’s bike and pedestrian planner. The Richmond.com website, affiliated with the Richmond Times-Dispatch, published a thorough summary of the talk, “10 Things Every City Can Do for Sustainable Transportation.”

Getting Parking Right

Getting Parking Right

Parking policy guru Jeff Tumlin will outline sixteen ways to tailor parking policies to meet parking demand while reducing some of the negative effects of current policies. D.C. Department of Transportation’s Associate Director Sam Zimbabwe will present the city’s latest thinking on how to take the lessons learned from around the country to craft parking policies that support community goals. Join us to learn about best practices and what D.C. government is planning to do to get parking right.

Testimony before the D.C. Historic Preservation Review Board, Support for McMillan Sand Filtration Plant Master Plan Update

Please accept our testimony on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. My organization works to ensure that transportation and development decisions in the Washington D.C. region accommodate growth while revitalizing communities, providing more housing and travel choices, and conserving our natural and historic areas.

We wish to express our support for the revised Master Plan for the McMillan Sand Filtration Plant proposal. The new plan takes an already thoughtful plan and provides additional open space and careful treatment of the unique historic resources of the site. The plan will restore and provide public access to key elements of the distinctive historic resources. This would not be possible without the redevelopment program that helps pay for the cost of the restoration.

We recognize that the expansion of park space on the site was in part driven by D.C. Water’s enhancement of stormwater management and flood mitigation efforts. The expanded park space, driven both by D.C. Water and public demand for a larger park, has traded off a significant loss of affordable housing for the space. This is a major disappointment and a loss of D.C.’s use of public lands to address the housing needs of many residents, especially at lower income levels of 60 percent of AMI and below.

Notwithstanding this significant loss, we recognize the important historic preservation, public space, housing, and commercial space contributions of the revised Master Plan. For decades, access to this large area was prohibited, creating a wide gap between surrounding activities and neighborhoods. The revised plan would make this historic resource featured in a major public park a citywide destination.  The Master Plan honors and replicates the historic landscape elements of the Olmsted Walk that have disappeared from the site. We agree with the staff comment that additional work should be done with DDOT to ensure that the Olmsted Walk connection to the sidewalk design is more than a standard sidewalk.  This might require some flexibility in DDOT’s design standards.

The plan appropriately focuses taller office buildings towards Michigan Avenue and tapers building heights and forms as the development moves south to meet rowhouse neighbors. The plan adds separation to the neighborhood to the south with a large public park. Large scale buildings are needed close to Michigan Avenue to give a sense of enclosure and connect to the Washington Hospital Center. Eventually, we hope these new buildings will encourage reconfiguration of the hospital complex to create more pedestrian-oriented designs.

Preservation of Cell 14 and recreation of the Olmstead Walk along North Capitol Street highlight the historic features of the site; however, they should be balanced with the need to support a better pedestrian environment along these busy streets by better connecting the pedestrian to adjacent uses on the site.

The plan for complementary new uses of retail, offices, and residential will strengthen the facing hospital complex and reconnect the site the city. These proposed uses are likely to build upon and amplify the contribution that current hospital center-related activities make to D.C.’s economy and employment base.  While the northern components of the plan better connect the site to its surroundings, the large park and recreated Olmsted Walk also allow the site to stand out as a distinctive and special place.

Overall, we support the revised master plan as a sensitive approach to preserving and making publically accessible this industrial architectural and public works heritage. The housing, retail, and office components help address the needs of a growing city and hospital district. Given that we have already lost a significant number of low income housing units planned in the first Master Plan, we ask that historic design guidance work with existing proposed levels of housing and commercial space, and not force further reductions.  While we would like to see significantly more affordable housing in this plan, the redevelopment plan does contribute to important community and citywide needs. The proposed plan for preservation and development is a compromise to enable the restoration of this distinctive historic resource.

Thank you for your consideration.

Cheryl Cort
Policy Director