The Washington, DC region is great >> and it can be greater.

Posts in category Smart Growth

Architecture


Does DC want boring architecture? Sort of.

DC has a lot of boring architecture, and that's no mistake; a cheap federal government and a bevy of paper pushers keep the District that way. At least that's what a few experts on architecture and development in DC had to say at a panel last week.


Is DC architecture inherently boring? Photo by Bossi on Flickr.

Turncoats, an urbanist debate group, hosted its first DC debate last week on the question of whether or not the District wants boring architecture. The organization works to encourage provocative discussion, fueling everyone—including audience members—with a shot of liquor before things get started and only assigning the panelists sides after they've taken the stage.

Payton Chung of the Urban Land Institute (and a member of Greater Greater Washington's editorial board), Brian Miller of Edit Lab at Streetsense, Nooni Reatig of Suzane Reatig Architecture, and Mina Wright of the General Services Administration and National Capital Planning Commission (who was careful to stress that all of her statements were hers alone and not those of her employer) participated in the panel.

Initially, Payton and Nooni were assigned the position that DC does indeed want boring architecture, while Brian and Mina had to argue that isn't the case.

Despite their supposed sides, the panelists coalesced in agreement that DC architecture is boring... they just differed on the reasons why. For example, Payton argued that it is the embodiment of DC's culture of middle-management paper pushers while Mina said it was simply the result of a cheap federal government keen to maximize usable space in its office buildings.

We (Edward and Joanne) attended the panel with the intent recounting the interesting tidbits in the style of of a Five Thirty Eight slack chat, where site contributors have an online discussion that they then transcribe.

Edward Russell (ER): It was clear to me that the panelists, whether they took the pro or con position, feel that DC's architecture is boring. I do wish those who argued that DC does in fact want boring architecture had said more about why boring architecture can still be interesting.

Joanne Pierce (JP): I expected the panelists to discuss DC's architecture as it is now, why it appears to be boring, and whether they agree (since boring is relative). "City architecture is boring" is a popular opinion. You can google any city and "boring architecture" and get dozens of articles decrying NYC, Boston, LA, etc., for being filled with boxy, glass buildings.

ER: Exactly. I felt that some were a bit of tongue-and-cheek, especially on the con side—though the two blended together a bit—with Nooni arguing that multiple streets lined with "Soul Cycle, Chipotle and Starbucks" made her feel comfortable, which was clearly a dig at the homogeneity of it all.

JP: There were lots of zingers, which were fun and spirited. I think everyone truly enjoys living in DC, and they can still poke fun at its stodgy reputation. That was an interesting comment on the sameness of our streets, which Mina echoed with her comment about Federal Triangle being lovely, but "you don't want to live in a city of Federal Triangles." I appreciated that comment because Federal Triangle happens to be that prime example of DC federal building run amok. It's just federal building after federal building. But it can be lovely!


Federal Triangle. Photo by Irakil on Flickr.

ER: It can be lovely. There is certainly a grandeur of the federal DC, with the ordered avenues and the neo-classical buildings.

JP: I'm a little biased because I work in the Ronald Reagan Building.

ER: One thing that surprised me was how the height limit only came up once, and it was an audience member saying they didn't think that is the issue holding back DC architecture. I expected it to be discussed more.

JP: I did, too. I think that's owing to the structure, where the panelists didn't bring it up, except to say that we don't need skyscrapers. The discussion seemed to be more about the overall uniformity that exists in DC. I was also surprised that the discussion focused mostly on public or semi-public buildings, and not much at all on residences.

ER: Yes, I think that was the result of, as Payton put it, the fact that DC is a city of "middle class, paper-pushing bureaucrats." A lot of the speakers built off that. I agree that the federal government has had an outsize impact on DC architecture for decades—centuries even—but the panelists took it a step further and argued that we're a city of bureaucrats who ultimately want an unadorned box (or row house) rather than some limit-pushing designed residence, whether in a tower or a house.

JP: There's some historical connection with that comment. Lots of our boxy tan buildings are brutalist, and a lot of those came about because of the federal government. For instance, the Weaver building, which is where Housing and Urban Development is now, was built according to President Kennedy's architectural initatives. So if we think the Weaver's big, boxy (it's actually kind of curved) look is unattractive, it is because Kennedy wanted it to represent the strength of America.


The Weaver Building. Photo by Kjetil Ree on Flickr.

ER: Like Brian said: "DC has lots of cutting edge architecture, it's just from 100 years ago." Or 50 years ago in the case of President Kennedy.

JP: Concrete is wonderful! You'll see! Going back to your comment about wanting unadorned, big boxes—I'm no architect, but it seems like when your primary need is space to house many people (for housing or for work) your most logical shape is a square or rectangle, not a curve or a triangle. It seems like there should be a way to combine the two, but then you sometimes get the 20 Fenchurch building, which was Brian's example of ugly design.


20 Fenchurch Street in London. Photo by Matt Buck on Flickr.

ER: Yes, that is something DC architecture does well—maximizing the amount of space available for workers or for residents, within the limits that exist for buildings (height limit, plot size, whatever). As Mina put it, "I think the Feds are at fault. Why? They're cheap."

JP: The cheapness of government makes a lot of sense but I think it's more of a cultural cheapness. Maybe for a long time, we just didn't want to stand out. Or at least, the people in power who made the decisions didn't think the city needed to stand out. Except with The National Mall.

ER: Did you agree with the general conclusion that so much generally mediocre architecture will make the unique, interesting buildings in DC stand out? I agree with the premise but wonder how we get to the point where we have unique buildings to stand out from the crowd. Like Atlantic Plumbing (2112 8th Street NW), I do like it, it's more industrial then we generally have here, but at the same time it is still a steel and glass rectangular box.


Atlantic Plumbing. Photo by Ted Eytan on Flickr.

JP: I think that the question of what is boring should be reframed. Are we boring, or are we just not a place where we have singular, instantly recognizable buildings. Things that show up in magazines, like Brian pointed out, and things that wow people as they drive by. Is that what we consider to be the most important?

ER: We have a few remarkable buildings, but I'd say they're iconic more due to their historical significance than their architecture (the White House, the Capitol).

JP: Certainly, we have the White House and the Capitol and the monuments. But beyond that, when we talk about iconic buildings that aren't Federal... I think the premise of whether our uniformity allows the interesting buildings to stand out is totally right. The African American history museum stands out because it's brown and not in the same architectural style as many others.

ER: It certainly does, whether you like the design or not.

JP: Sometimes, you just need one bold idea to start things off.

Transit


What's so great about the Purple Line, anyway?

With a recent court decision from a group of opponents delaying the Purple Line once again, it's easy to forget how many people support it, from local environmental groups to Governor Hogan. Let's remember why they fight for this project, and why it will get built one day.


This will get built. Image from Montgomery County.

The Purple Line will be a 16-mile light rail line between Bethesda and New Carrollton. It'll connect three Metro lines, all three MARC commuter rail lines, and Amtrak, as well as hundreds of local bus routes. It'll serve two of the region's biggest job centers, Bethesda and Silver Spring, as well as Maryland's flagship university. It'll give Montgomery and Prince George's counties a fast, reliable alternative to current bus service and Beltway traffic.

However, it'll do a lot more than that.

1) It'll make walking and bicycling a lot easier and safer. The Purple Line project includes rebuilding or extending trails across Montgomery and Prince George's counties, building on the area's growing bike network.

The Capital Crescent Trail, which ends two miles outside of Silver Spring, will get fully paved and extended to the Silver Spring Metro station, where it'll connect to the Metropolitan Branch Trail. The trail will get a new bridge at Connecticut Avenue and new underpasses at Jones Bridge Road, and 16th Street, so trail users won't have to cross those busy streets.


Wayne Avenue in Silver Spring will get a new trail. Photo by the author.

Streets in other parts of the corridor will get rebuilt with new sidewalks and bike lanes. University Boulevard in Langley Park will get a road diet. Wayne Avenue in Silver Spring will get a new, extended Green Trail.

2) It will let more people live and work near transit more affordably. Metro has its problems, but people still value living in walkable, transit-served neighborhoods. As a result, communities with Metro stations can be very expensive. The Purple Line puts more neighborhoods and more homes near transit, as well as more opportunities to build new homes near transit, helping meet demand and fighting spikes in home prices.


How far you can get by transit from Riverdale today and after the Purple Line is built.

3) It will improve commutes far beyond Bethesda to New Carrollton. The Purple Line will dramatically improve transportation access for people who live or work near one of its 21 stations. But even those whose homes or jobs aren't near the Purple Line may travel through the corridor, getting a faster, more reliable trip.

Right now, a bus trip between Silver Spring and Bethesda can take 20 minutes at rush hour (though in reality it takes much longer due to traffic). On the Purple Line, that trip would take just nine minutes. That's a time savings for anyone passing through the Purple Line corridor, like if you were going from Riverdale (which will have a station) to Rock Spring Business Park in Bethesda (which won't).

4) It's finally bringing investment to some of our most disadvantaged neighborhoods. Communities like Long Branch, Langley Park, and Riverdale have long awaited the kind of amenities more affluent communities take for granted. When Maryland and the federal government agreed to fund the Purple Line, people took notice. Long Branch businesses formed an association.

Riverdale residents and business owners are pushing for a more attractive station. A few blocks away, this ad for a new house being built lists exactly one feature: "located within steps of purple metro line's Beacon Heights Station (officially approved by state of Maryland for 5.6 billion)."

While the Purple Line can help meet the demand for transit-served housing, there are real concerns that home prices may still rise, resulting in gentrification and displacement. That's why residents, business owners, and the University of Maryland partnered on the Purple Line Community Compact, which creates a plan for ensuring that people can afford to stay.

5) We actually don't know everything the Purple Line will do. Transportation planners can estimate how many people will use a transit line, but we can't predict how it will affect people's decisions about where to live, work, shop, or do other things. That's the most exciting part.


Metro helped revitalize Silver Spring. The Purple Line can do this for more communities. Photo by the author.

Metro helped make 14th Street a nightlife destination. It turned Arlington into an economic powerhouse. It transformed Merrifield's warehouses into townhouses. Those changes weren't guaranteed, but as a region we took the risk and it paid off.

We're poised to do the same thing for a new generation of neighborhoods along the Purple Line.

While a recent lawsuit from a group of Chevy Chase residents will has halted the project, transportation officials seem hopeful that this will be a temporary delay. The facts remain that this is a strong project that has major benefits for Maryland.

That's why everyone from environmental groups to neighborhood groups to business groups support this project. That's why Governor Hogan agreed to build it, even if he did make some changes to save money.

And that's why, despite a small but vocal opposition, it will get built.

Development


Clearly we need to have more happy hours in Prince George's

It's been six years since we had a happy hour in Prince George's County. Tuesday night, we came back with County Executive Rushern Baker and had such a huge turnout we couldn't fit on the sidewalk.


If you weren't in Mount Rainier Tuesday night, you missed out. All photos and videos by the author unless otherwise noted.

Since we started organizing happy hours seven years ago, we've picked bars and restaurants to visit based on one rule: it should be near a Metro station, so everyone can get there without a car.

We've had no trouble finding places in DC, Montgomery County, and Northern Virginia, where bars and restaurants cluster around Metro stations. But I've struggled to find venues in Prince George's County, which has lagged the rest of the region in building around Metro, though that's starting to change under County Executive Rushern Baker.


Rushern Baker greets the crowd.

With help from Baker's staff, who promoted the event, and GGWash contributor/Mount Rainier councilmember Tracy Loh, we found Bird Kitchen + Cocktails and agreed to bend the Metro station rule. And we got our highest turnout ever.


Photo by David Alpert.

Nearly 100 people showed up Tuesday night from across DC, Maryland, and Virginia, forming a crowd that spilled out of the tiny restaurant onto the sidewalk and into the street. Little traffic jams formed on Rhode Island Avenue as passing drivers tried to figure out what was going on.

GGWash happy hour slows traffic on Rhode Island Avenue
Happy hours as traffic calming.

You bet we'll be back to Prince George's County. Thanks to Rushern Baker for speaking, to Tracy Loh for organizing, Bird Kitchen for handling a huge crowd with grace, and to everybody who came out!

Development


The biggest beneficiaries of housing subsidies? The wealthy.

It's almost the first of the month, and that means rent's due. That rent or mortgage check is the single biggest expense in most Americans' budgets, so it's no wonder that Congress directs a ton of federal dollars to housing. But what should be surprising—and infuriating—is that a lot of this support goes to housing the wealthy, while very little goes to those who need help landing a stable home.


Photo by Peter on Flickr.

These policies aren't accidents—they're bad choices that we should simply stop making.

We're in the middle of an affordable housing crisis

The United States is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis. Nearly 1 in 3 households with a mortgage devotes more than 30 percent of their income to their home. The situation is even worse for renters—more than half of the United States' 38 million rental households are shouldering a cost burden.

Some of this crisis is fallout from the Great Recession, which brought homeownership rates to historic lows. African-American and Latino households were hit particularly hard, because of predatory lending practices that targeted racially segregated communities .

Congress spends a lot on housing, mostly through tax programs

Given these crises in housing affordability and homeownership, congressional strategies to support housing deserve special scrutiny.

Congress supports housing in two main ways: rental assistance programs and homeownership tax programs. In 2015, the price tag for federal rental assistance programs—which includes Section 8 housing vouchers, public housing, Homeless Assistance Grants, and other programs—was $51 billion. In contrast, two of the largest homeownership tax programs—the Mortgage Interest Deduction and the Property Tax Deduction—cost $90 billion in 2015. That's nearly double the amount spent on public benefit housing programs.

The biggest beneficiary of the billions spent on homeownership tax programs? The wealthy.

There's nothing wrong with providing support through the tax code—benefits are benefits, whether you get them from your local HUD office or on your tax return. The important question is: who benefits? Rental assistance programs are designed to help those who will benefit most—primarily individuals and families with less income and less stable housing. But this isn't how Congress designed homeownership tax programs. All told, households making over $100,000 a year received nearly 90 percent of the $90 billion spent on the two tax programs discussed above. Households making less than $50,000 got a little more than 1 percent of those benefits.

It gets uglier. There are nearly eight million low-income homeowners that struggle to pay for housing from month to month. On average, low-income households get about eight cents per month from these two homeownership tax programs. Eight cents. There are also about four million middle-income households paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing. The average monthly benefit from these tax programs for middle-income earners? Twelve bucks. Don't spend it all in one place.

In contrast, the top 0.1 percent of earners—folks with an average annual income of more than $9 million—get an average of $1,236 per month (nearly $15,000 per year) from just these two homeownership tax programs. That federal benefit is much more than the typical cost of rent in most American cities, and it's going to wealthy households who really don't need help keeping a roof over their heads.

Why these tax programs are so upside down

So why are these tax programs so out of whack? It's no accident—it's how the programs are designed. Most low-income families don't even qualify because they don't itemize deductions. Even among those that do qualify, every dollar they deduct is worth less than a dollar that a high-income earner deducts. As nonsensical as it sounds, the value of homeownership tax support goes up as your income goes up. In addition, higher-income households get bigger deductions when they buy bigger houses (or bigger yachts, which qualify for the same tax benefits).

If we ran the Food Stamp (SNAP) program the same way we run our housing tax programs, low-income parents buying a simple, nutritious meal for their kids would get somewhere around zero dollars in federal support. Millionaires charging their MasterCard with a $5,000 FleurBurger with seared foie gras, truffle sauce, and bottle of 1995 Château Petrus would get a few thousand dollars in federal benefits.

Clearly, this would be a crazy way to run a social program—but this really is how we structure billions in support for wealthy homeowners through the tax code. Even worse, study after study shows that the Mortgage Interest Deduction doesn't even succeed in boosting homeownership.

How we can get away from this upside-down system

It's not hard to think up a better way to spend $90 billion. We could redirect this spending to help lower-income Americans save for a down payment, or use some of these funds to create a first-time homebuyer credit, or create a simple refundable credit for all homeowners. Or all of the above. That's the focus of the Turn it Right-Side Up campaign, which zeroes in on reforming unfair tax programs like these homeownership credits.

A version of this post first ran at Talk Poverty.

Development


How five local businesspeople would tackle gentrification on 14th Street

As recently as ten years ago, DC's bustling 14th Street corridor was riddled with crime and blight. Its rapid transformation is one version of the same story you can find all over the District. How can change of this magnitude serve existing communities rather than displace them?


14th Street NW in 2014. Photo by Ted Eytan on Flickr.

On August 6th at The Studio Theater, a panel of speakers hosted by The Washington Post gathered to discuss this challenge, providing personal insights into how rapid transformation can be better managed and implemented so that it benefits everyone.

The panelists included Busboys and Poets owner Andy Shallal, Mindful Restaurant Group owner Ari Gejdenson; Erik Bergman, a director of operations with the Neighborhood Restaurant Group; JBG Companies vice president Evan Regan-Levine; and Meridith Burkus, the managing director of Studio Theatre. Local Washington Post columnist John Kelly moderated the discussion.


The panel. Photo by Tina Revazi.

The panelists discussed two separate (but interrelated) forms of gentrification. One is economic gentrification. In the context of the discussion, economic gentrification is the result of unsustainable costs of living due to the regulatory climate imposed by local government (for example, the expensive and unsubsidized cost of purchasing land).

Evan Regan-Levine summed up this challenge "How can we pair smart legislation with the desire to have the private sector invest in and redevelop neighborhoods without destroying that fabric?"

Then, there is cultural gentrification. In the context of the discussion, cultural gentrification is the result of residents feeling marginalized and unwelcome in their own neighborhoods, with their interests being superseded by surrounding business interests. To that end, businesses moving into newly developed neighborhoods hold a level of responsibility for ensuring that members of the community are welcomed and included.

Better public policy can shape the outcomes of economic gentrification

"A city is not a bank, it's not a business. It really needs to think in terms of 'What is our responsibility?'" said Andy Shallal. "First and foremost, it is for the citizens. And it's not just the new people moving in. It's the people who have lived here. Gentrification isn't gravity...it happens because it's intentional. It's intentional by the city, it's intentional by government."

Part of the responsibility falls on government to make diverse and affordable development feasible for developers.

It starts with the price of housing, which is driven by the cost of land. And cost of land is, to a degree, controllable by government.

Communities are marginalized when they are displaced from their homes, so if housing could be made more affordable, the level of displacement would decrease. In an attempt to level the playing field, government needs to be held accountable for ensuring that all residents can afford to live in DC, while balancing the power of developers and special interest groups.


14th and U Streets NW in 1950. Photo by Addison Scurlock.

One way to create more affordable housing is through public-private partnerships between developers and the city government.

"We have been really willy-nilly about giving away public property, and I think that's been one of the problems. You have to hold the city accountable, and say, 'You cannot give away land unless you do some really serious concessions.'" said Shallal.

An example of such a concession is subsidizing the cost of affordable housing, so that the burden of charging reduced rates for affordable housing doesn't rest squarely on the shoulders of private developers.

"The Housing Trust Fund has $100 million, but it needs to at least be doubled," said Shallal. "And there is money, this is the time. The city has almost $2 billion in surplus. This is the moment to say, 'Let's invest and let's plan for the future', otherwise we're going to sit and have this same conversation next year, and the year after, and the year after."

While the Housing Trust Fund was infused with nearly $100 million during last year's budget process, there's still lots of remaining work to be done to ensure the fund ultimately helps those who need it most.

Businesses share responsibility for welcoming members of existing communities

"The government can play a role, but I think we have to play a role as well", said Meredith Burkis, regarding the need for local businesses to be conscious of their impact on existing communities.

"One of the things we've been doing over course of the last year is asking how [The Studio Theater] can play a role in that challenge. We all have to have a commitment to understanding that there are people who have been here, it's their community. What role can we play in that community? There's not one answer. Government, yes, has to play a role. But we have to make it a priority too."

There are many examples of how this can be put into action. It starts, as Shallal pointed out, with raising awareness of cultural divisions and proactively working to avoid them.

Shallal stated, "It's not just about a business opening and saying 'I'm successful, I'm doing well'. It's about a business saying that success doesn't stop at the bottom line of a dollar, but it stops at 'Am I really representing and feeling good about being here, can I walk outside my door and have my head raised up high, and feel like I'm not contributing to the destruction of somebody else's life or culture?' That's the question that us as business owners have to ask ourselves every single day."

The construction of the menu itself at Busboys and Poets is an example of maintaining this awareness. Initially, Shallal hired a chef who put together an upscale menu that would likely leave many members of the local community feeling disregarded.

"I looked at the menu, and half of the things on there I couldn't understand let alone would want to have on the menu. In order for us to be accessible to the neighborhood, we had to have food that [customers] feel comfortable ordering without having to feel stupid about looking at the menu."

"In order to be friendly to the neighborhood that you're coming into, you can't just parachute into it. You need to build from the bottom," Shallal concluded.

This is a powerful truth to be acknowledged when it comes to new businesses planting roots in revitalized neighborhoods, if they hope to embrace the past while welcoming the future.

Development


DC's Edgewood neighborhood is set to get more affordable housing and connections to the Met Branch Trail

Plans for a massive new development planned along Rhode Island Avenue NE include affordable housing, new connections to a large nearby apartment complex, and links to an important bike trail.


An elevation showing the first phase (completed, on the right) and later phases (outlined in white) of the planned Rhode Island Center development. Image by MRP Realty.

Rhode Island Center is a roughly 1,600-residential unit mixed-use development that will rise on the site of the Big Lots and Forman Mills between the Metropolitan Branch Trail and 4th Street NE.

This is the ideal transit-oriented development for the region: lots of housing, both affordable and market rate, a block from the Metro on a site that is currently a suburban-style strip mall. To top it off, it includes needed pedestrian and cycling improvements to the surrounding area.

Developer MRP Realty plans to include about 128 units in the District's Inclusionary Zoning program, build new stairways up to Edgewood Commons on the hill above it, make improvements to the MBT, install two new Capital Bikeshare docks and provide residents $225 in incentives towards alternative transportation options, like a bikeshare or carshare membership, a benefits package submitted to the DC Planning Commission on 1 August shows.

Affordable housing

The project will be built in phases, with the first two buildings fronting the MBT scheduled to open in 2019, confirms MRP's vice-president of development Michael Skena in an email. Phase one will include about 450 units, with 8%, or about 36 units, set aside for affordable housing.


Looking south at the first phase of Rhode Island Center from the MBT. Image by MRP Realty.

Half of the affordable units will be for households of four earning up to $54,300 a year, or 50% of the DC region's area median income (AMI), and half for similarly sized households earning up to $86,880, the DC Department of Housing and Community Development's (DHCD) 2016 inclusionary zoning schedule shows. Rents for two-bedroom apartments are capped at $1,222 a month and $1,955 a month, respectively, for the two income groups.

The affordable housing in Rhode Island Center's later phases will see slightly more units going to needier families, with 5% for those in the lower income bucket and 3% in the higher one.

The income levels for both the first and later phases of the development will be set if they are approved by the Zoning Commission on September 12, says Skena, even if the DC Council passes a pending change to the IZ program lowering the maximum household income level to 60% of AMI.

However, commissioners from ANC 5E, which oversees the area including Rhode Island Center, declined to support the development unless MRP includes nearly double the number of units, 14% of the total, in the IZ program at 60% of AMI, in a letter to the Planning Commission dated July 7.

While further changes to the affordable housing component in the development are possible before the September hearing, they are unlikely to include any units at the lower household income level sought by the ANC.

In July, the DHCD objected to a proposal that affordable units be available to households earning up to 60% of AMI in the Eckington Yards development. While the main objection was to a request by the developer to administer the units itself outside of the agency's IZ program, the agency emphasized a need for developers to be held to all the District's existing laws and regulations.

Current regulations require that units in the IZ program are available to households earning up to either 50% or 80% of AMI.

Stairways and connections

MRP promises to build two new stairways between Edgewood Commons and Rhode Island Center. This would provide residents of the apartment complex with a new direct connection to the MBT and Rhode Island Ave Metro station, eliminating the current about half-a-mile journey through the existing shopping center and up 4th Street.


The planned stairway connecting Edgewood Commons to the MBT. Image by MRP Realty.

The first stairway, which would be located in the northeast corner of the development adjacent to the trail, would be built with the first phase. The stairs would be closed between 1 am and 4:30 am on weekdays, and 3 am and 6:30 am on weekends.

Easier access to the Metro and trail would benefit residents of the mixed-income Edgewood Commons community. It would improve connections between the complex and the east side of the neighborhood, and potentially increase economic opportunities for residents. For example, the time it takes to walk to the shopping center with Giant Foods and Home Depot would be cut in half.

Connections to the MBT are a big part of the Rhode Island Center proposal. The central artery through the project will stretch from 4th Street NE to a new plaza where the trail and bridge to the Rhode Island Ave station meet, and include a new protected bike lane.


Looking east down the central corridor through Rhode Island Center towards the MBT. Image by MRP Realty.

The developer will realign the MBT so it passes under the stairs to the bridge to reduce pedestrian conflicts in the planned plaza, and make other signage, wayfinding, landscaping and lighting improvements.

The benefits package also includes $10,000 for the connection between the MBT and Franklin Street NE, which was included in the NoMa Business Improvement District's MBT Safety and Access Study earlier this year.

MRP will install two new bikeshare docks as part of the package. One next to the trail near the planned plaza and one on 4th Street NE between Bryant Street and Franklin Street.

Support Us
DC Maryland Virginia Arlington Alexandria Montgomery Prince George's Fairfax Charles Prince William Loudoun Howard Anne Arundel Frederick Tysons Corner Baltimore Falls Church Fairfax City
CC BY-NC