Greater Greater Washington

Public Spaces


North Capitol study plans "gateway", disappoints neighbors

The "North Capitol Street Urban Design & Transportation Study," sponsored by the Office of Planning, DDOT and NCPC, aims to to transform the freeway-like North Capitol street into an attractive gateway to DC from the north. At a public meeting last night, though, neighbors mostly heaped criticism OP for the narrow scope of the study and for their other frustrations with DC's land use and transportation decisionmaking.

The study focuses on the stretch of North Capitol Street between Hawaii Ave and Michigan Ave, where it passes by the Washington Hospital Center, the Armed Forces Retirement Home, and Catholic University. This stretch is currently a limited access freeway, with a prominent cloverleaf at the interchange between North Capitol and Irving Street. It's designed to funnel people downtown, but severely limits east-west connectivity. There are also no pedestrian, bicycle or transit facilities going north-south through this stretch. The freeway configuration is inhospitable to pedestrians and encourages unsafe driving. Traffic ought to move at city speeds rather than freeway speeds.

Further, the nearby institutions (AFRH, WHA and CUA) generally focus inwards. Even the condominium and apartment communities off Michigan Ave have a very suburban design removed from the street grid.


A wasteful use of land in the middle of DC. View larger map.

The study team from EEK Architects acknowledged these issues hopes to turn North Capitol into a symbolic entryway into the downtown core from the north. They talked about creating civic spaces, establishing a unique identity, exploring alternatives to the cloverleaf, and creating a more urban, pedestrian-oriented and transit-supportive North Capitol Street. They are looking to East Capitol Street and Rock Creek Parkway for examples. Both move a lot of traffic but also create character for the area. This is only the beginning a 12-week study, so the presentation was sparse on specific details.

After the presentation, the discussion quickly devolved into complaints, and outright anger in some cases. Many neighbors had high hopes, based on the meeting announcement, that the study was going to look at the area as a whole, including the Brookland/CUA and Georgia Ave/Petworth Metro stations, potential for cross-town light rail service, bicycle lanes, and more. After badgering the officials, attendees realized that the study focuses very narrowly on the cloverleaf and won't address many of these larger issues.

Area residents also expressed clear frustration at the lack of communication between the OP and elected ANCs. Brooklanders, in particular, complained about communication. Much of this stems from their ongoing struggle with government agencies to bury the power lines along 12th Street. There are also 6 million square feet of proposed development in the area, currently in various stages of the planning process. This includes including CUA South Campus, the Armed Forces Retirement Home, the McMillan Plant, and Washington Hospital Center, among others.

With traffic already heavy around North Capitol, residents wanted to see a more comprehensive approach to these current problems. Otherwise, they're sure to get worse as these developments break ground.

Comments

Add a comment »

also, if youre a bloomingdale/eckington resident, traffic comes flying down north cap right through our 'hood. it seems rather short sighted to take the clover leaf alone if we are looking at the street as a gateway corridor.

theres a great opportunity for a light rail line on northcap i think. use the exiting underpasses at rhode island and new york to bury part of it, and return the original street scape. then have it come up at mcmillan and crowd the traffic a bit ass it heads north to CUA. that along with a more walkable corridor would slow traffic and make it a lot friendlier area. plus, people might realize that they are going through neighborhoods.

by dano on Jan 14, 2009 2:28 pm • linkreport

FWIW, having a fast moving wormhole like that stretch of N. Cap is useful for getting somewhere quickly, you know, like if you're an ambulance driver, you have someone bleeding out, and you want to get them to WHC before they die.

by Ward 1 Guy on Jan 14, 2009 2:34 pm • linkreport

I have to agree with Ward 1. I'm as pro-urbanism as they come but training your ammo on "that" stretch of N.Cap seems to be a waste of energy. There's no existing urbanism abutting the stretch and unlike the Whitehurst freeway, you're not getting an instant bang from redesigning it. In the 50 year plan a light rail makes some sence along with some master plan, but there are so many potential winners that this one deserves a pass.

by Thayer-D on Jan 14, 2009 3:20 pm • linkreport

agreed with ward 1 guy and thayer-d. i'm a bloomingdale resident, and while i don't like the speeding freeway-esque nature of north cap. in the area south of michigan (all the way to H street, really), i feel like that's a beast to be dealt with separately.

the cloverleaf at irving was just completely rebuilt, at what i'm sure is no small expense.

i agree that, between michigan and hawaii, the road isn't the correct type for good uranism, but that area is lined with institutional uses that, for the most part, aren't about to be densely filled with houses, shops, etc. anytime soon. the area right at the corner of irving and north cap, yes, but nowhere else.

it doesn't hurt to have one fast way to get through town there. if i'm driving (gasp!) from bloomingdale to anywhere in upper northwest, taking north cap up to missouri/military makes for a very, very fast route.

by IMGoph on Jan 14, 2009 4:11 pm • linkreport

U werent' at the meeting. The whole point is to provide the backbone of urbanism to be able to extend urbanism within that corridor, and in relationship to the new development that will come over the next 20 years.

The problem with how the meeting was termed beforehand is that given the expressed sentiments at other planning efforts for a broader transportation study, including discussion of crosstown streetcar service, people were disappointed.

That being said, despite the disappointment and Harriet Tergoning's willingness/agreement to slow the process down, people still stayed and did the breakouts, including some of the people who during the meeting expressed some of the most vehement sentiments.

If the presentation had been a bit more exhaustive, and had they been more direct about the scope, a lot of the vehemence would have been headed off probably.

by Richard Layman on Jan 14, 2009 6:47 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or