Our curb cut is limited to the present circumstances

Parking

Our curb cut is limited to the present circumstances

by David Alpert • November 6, 2008 2:26 pm

How often does Councilmember Phil Mendelson (at-large) personally show up to the Board of Zoning Adjustment to testify in support of a variance? I suspect not often, but show up he did at yesterday's BZA hearing on the 14th and U "Utopia" project.

Treto Way. Photo by David Alpert.

Mendelson read a letter in support of locating the proposed garage entrance on 14th Street instead of in the alley behind. The developer, the Dupont ANC, and local residents and businesses all want this as well. Councilmember Jack Evans also submitted a concurring letter, which his commitee clerk, Jeff Coudriet (who also lives nearby), presented at the hearing. The BZA voted to approve the curb cut and all of the variances the developer needed.

I agree in this case. This is an unusual block with an unusual alley system, and the garage entrance poses many problems. But I'm very concerned that this not set precedent for other, less exceptional situations. Along U Street west of 13th, developers plan to replace the one-story, bland Rite Aid with a larger hotel and ground-floor retail. The rear of the building faces a standard alley, but a row of townhouses back onto the other side of the alley. ~~Some of those residents are trying to pressure that developer~~ The developer currently proposes to build their garage entrance across the 13th Street sidewalk, instead of off the adjacent straight alley.

Bad idea. Click to enlarge.

Unlike at Utopia, using this alley doesn't require cars to make two sharp turns and take three separate alleys. Unlike at Utopia, there are no alley dwellings. This garage entrance could be located at the eastern end of the alley, so cars only have to drive on a very short part. I'd even be okay with widening the alley a little bit right at the end, so there's enough room for one car in each direction. But another, extremely wide curb cut right next to an existing alley curb cut harms the rest of the public too much, while alley access to the garage harms the local property owners little.

It's clear that some major political chips got called in to get Mendelson to show up in person for the Utopia curb cut, and to generate the repeated letters from Evans supporting neighbors' position on the project. The political pressure was so potent that yesterday afternoon, DDOT decided to withdraw its original comments opposing the curb cut. That's politics, and I don't agree with those who complain about corruption every time an elected official weighs in. Taking positions on issues and pushing agencies on behalf of constituents is what elected officials do, and if you want to influence them, organize.

While Evans and Mendelson weren't wrong about this curb cut, we need to get organized and connected enough to ensure that Councilmembers aren't sending letters in support of every curb cut when some residents don't want traffic in their alley. Alley traffic impacts the residents, but a curb cut impacts everyone else. A curb cut increases the opportunities for vehicles to hit pedestrians and bicycles; it reduces the space we have for sidewalk cafes; it visually widens the street, making drivers go faster.

Fortunately, Mendelson's letter gives us good ammunition for differentiating the Utopia case from others, like the 13th and U Rite Aid/Hotel:

There are very few communities in the District like the one comprising the residents of [the alleys behind Utopia]. The two others that come to mind are Blagden Alley in Shaw and Brown's Court on Capitol Hill ... It is important to consider that this space is atypical. It is unlike the typical square with all the dwellings fronting on the public street, only to back up to alleys. [The residents of these alleys] must walk down their alleys to go anywhere, which creates unavoidable pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.

Public policy must balance a larger impact on a few against the smaller impact on many. Typically, in the political process, the few are better organized and louder than the many. Through this blog and Smart Growth organizations, we the many are getting organized. And I want to make it clear to Evans, Mendelson, and any other elected official that while I don't disagree with their views on the Utopia curb cut, such an exception, and their political muscle on its behalf, should be extremely, extremely rare.

Update: Wallach Place resident Guy Podgornik wrote in to explain that Wallach residents (the people across the alley) weren't pushing for the 13th Street curb cut, and heard this pressure came from HPO. I'm glad Wallach residents are okay with using a small portion of the alley for the parking and loading. At this point, the developer's latest plans include the 13th Street curb cut, and DDOT, HPO, and advocates should oppose it.

9 comments

Tags: curb cuts, DC, Jack Evans, Phil Mendelson, politics, U Street, Utopia project

DDOT anti-curb cut regulation important but needs flexibility (Oct 8, 2008)
This alternative is technically impossible because neighbors would complain (Nov 19, 2008)
Whitman-Walker project has positive impacts, too (Dec 3, 2008)
Preservation "incompatible" with historic preservation (Jan 11, 2008)
Unnecessary parking and a curb cut (Jun 23, 2008)

David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.

Comments
Add a comment »

Wait, I'm confused - I think one of those '14th and U's needs to be a '13th and U', or vice versa. Either that, or let's come up with some sort of actual name for these projects.

by Alex B. on Nov 6, 2008 3:14 pm • link • report

I replaced 14th and U with Utopia in most cases to be clear. I don't know of a name for the one at 13th, so I'm calling it the Rite Aid/Hotel project.

by David Alpert on Nov 6, 2008 3:21 pm • link • report

You're wrong about the general point I think. Yes politicians advocate based on supporters. But for the most part, people will always advocate for exceptions to general rules, and the govt. agencies will mostly advocate for adherence to the general principles. Better that DDOT go down in defeat than retract its position. Maybe its recommendation was flawed, I don't know that block well enough. And there is no question that DDOT makes mistakes all the time.

But still, having the Councilmember there is worrisome, just like it was at the ZC hearing when the staff member for Harry Thomas Jr. specifically read testimony from the Councilmember which was derisive of ANC6C's request for party status despite being located within 80 feet of the project, but across the ward border, and recommended that party status not be granted. The way that particular hearing worked, not one citizen had the right to respond. Fortunately, case law is reasonably clear, and the ZC made the right decision. Still, I'd call that a chilling effect, and encouraging more chilling effects is ... chilling.

I'd feel better about this if Councilmembers were speaking up for general high quality urban design principles, rather than exceptions to them.

by Richard Layman on Nov 6, 2008 3:34 pm • link • report

Thanks, David. That reads much better.

by Alex B. on Nov 6, 2008 3:49 pm • link • report

I don't mean to kiss butt, but this blog is doing tremendous things for smart growth advocacy. I'm continually shocked by how many people read GGW and refer to it... and people I would never expect to be reading blogs like this in the first place. Along with BeyondDC and UrbanSpaces, it has become the major regional voice for transit and smart growth. Kudos to David for all of his hard work. In the future, this blog will have considerable weight in influencing local elections for the better.

by SG on Nov 6, 2008 5:05 pm • link • report

I just heard the news of the BZA decision and read your blog and am simply astonished and cannot believe this outcome and the process that has led to this decision. I will be expressing my serious concerns to both Councilmember Evan's and Councilmember Mendelson's offices that their support did not truly reflect the voice of the community and that they only heard a small portion of the arguments, however what really astonishes me is that the impact report that DDOT requested of the developer was not considered by the board when the community was told for the past few months to wait for the report, then DDOT would then make its recommendation.

14th Street and U Street are major commercial corridors that have extremely high pedestrian sidewalk, bicycle lanes, and bus usage by design that will now be significantly interrupted by providing street access to the building, when a much better alternative, alley access, exists and was identified as the preferred choice of HPO, HPRB, DDOT, Office of Planning, the Cardozo Shaw Neighborhood Association, ANC1B and the majority of the businesses on 14th & U Streets, this is not some insignificant group of entities making these recommendations.

Here is something to consider:

The development of the Utopia project will significantly decrease the amount of traffic that is currently occurring in the alley as there will be centralized trash management with compacters, where currently there are multiple pick-ups of dumpsters for different businesses and the Dominoes delivery vehicles that currently zip in and out of the alley way at all times of the day will no longer be using the alley.

Providing alley access for the residents would probably result in maintaining the number of vehicle trips daily at close to the current usage, however they will be residents, instead of pizza deliveries and there will be fewer large commercial vehicles than before. However you must remember there still are regular truck deliveries and pick-ups and this is not just a residential street, it is a commercial alley.

I also have to ask how many people actually live in this alley that all these special accommodations are necessary. I can only think of a couple buildings that only have access from the alley and one of those is commercial offices, with all the major buildings having frontage and access off of U, T, 14th, or 15th.

There are reasons that alley dwellings are no longer legal, something that will be put to the test again by the Public Welfare Foundation that is once again pushing forward the development of Temperance Row in the alleys behind the U Street Metro, while not providing pedestrian access except through the alley.

This is a greener version of the project that Manna put forth and failed to get approved by zoning, and yet here they are again putting forward a plan that would require the families that these alley houses will be designed for to share an alley with all the businesses on U Street as there means of egress to their homes. That's just not right, particularly when other options are available to Public Welfare Foundation, that they refuse to consider.

On another note:

I do agree that this decision should not be seen as setting a precedence as this really sets a very bad one, particularly when it comes to urban design principles for walkable communities.

I also agree that there should not be a separate driveway for the JBG Hotel project at 13th & U. I would agree with the recommendation to widen the alley as was done on the south side of Union Row to enable two way traffic for garage access. I do support bringing a hotel to the site as it would do wonders to provide a customer base with disposable income that will enable the small boutiques and other shops to thrive, restaurants to have a lunch base, and patrons for the multiple arts venues. It also creates a perfect shared parking use for hotel patrons and visitors to the corridor in what will be a valeted program that maximizes usage of the available space.

Scott Pomeroy

by Scott Pomeroy on Nov 7, 2008 12:06 am • link • report

That is a fascinating and unique alley-way system back there. Does anyone know the history to it? Was there a livery stable back there once upon a time? Was there maybe a farmhouse ... which necessitate the unusual alley pattern to be built around it? If only walls could talk. It's definitely not you usually alley system and definitely deserves special treatment.

by Lance on Nov 7, 2008 11:05 pm • link • report

Since it appears that many people read your blog, the residents of Wallach Place feel that it is imperative to point out some inaccuracies with your posting regarding a curb cut for the proposed project at 13th and U Street. You state that some of the residents across the alley from the rear of the building are trying to pressure the developer to build the garage entrance across the 13th Street sidewalk. This simply is not true. After months of the residents attempting to set up a meeting with the developers, JBG, the developers finally agreed to meet with the residents in late August. The plan that JBG presented at this meeting included a curb cut on 13th (which is indicated in the diagram on your blog). This was the first time that the residents had heard anything about a curb cut. Knowing that this was a contentious issue with the proposed Utopia building, the residents asked JBG about the curb cut. JBG's response was that they planned the curb cut on the recommendation of the historic preservation staff. The residents were surprised by this statement. Residents did not suggest a curb cut, nor did they pressure the developer to provide one. The developers themselves presented this to the residents as part of their original plan.

The residents of Wallach Place and others in close proximity to the proposed development are excited at the prospect of the development of the site. At the same time, they want to be sure that whatever is built is appropriate for this historical neighborhood in terms of height, scale, and massing. They are concerned and active citizens who will continue to work hard to keep the neighborhood a great place to live. As such they have been open to meeting with the developer and anyone else who is interested to make sure that whatever is built fits into the neighborhood and is respectful to the residences that border on the project. It is therefore disheartening to see misinformation perpetuated in your blog. If you want to know what the residents think, just ask them. If you weren't at a meeting, please don't rely on a single source for information on what happened at that meeting, it could be wrong, and in this case it is.

by Guy Podgornik on Nov 13, 2008 6:11 pm • link • report

Guy: That's very good to hear. I've updated the article to reflect your comment. I'd heard resident pressure was generating this bad plan, and I'm glad that's not the case.

by David Alpert on Nov 14, 2008 11:05 am • link • report