Fort Totten development plans pedestrian street

Development

Fort Totten development plans pedestrian street

by David Alpert • January 26, 2009 3:12 pm

Earlier this month, DC officials announced another economic development deal to sell an unused parcel of public land for development. This parcel is very close to the Fort Totten Metro station, an area that has seen very little transit-oriented development despite its location on three Metro lines. Based on the publicly-released drawings, the project is working hard to create a walkable place where none exists today.

Rendering from the developers via DCMud. Click to enlarge.

The plan aims to turn a block of Riggs Road NE into a walkable business street. Besides a large grocery store, the drawings show small, individual shops along the street. Brightly striped crosswalks, wide sidewalks, and closely-spaced trees create a welcoming atmosphere. There's even on-street parallel parking on the redesigned Riggs Road.

Right now, the intersection of Riggs and South Dakota Avenue is a high-speed traffic zone, with ramps moving cars between the various roads in wide curves. This plan consolidates the intersection into one four-way intersection. Pedestrians will be able to cross at crosswalks instead of dodging traffic in freeway-like ramps.

Left: the area today (from Google Maps). Right: the proposed development. Click an image to enlarge.

Still, the new intersection, while a huge improvement, retains design elements that prioritize moving large numbers of vehicles over pedestrians. Most of the roads widen as they approach the intersection, to create a full complement of turn lanes. And one of the four crosswalks, along the south edge of South Dakota, is conspicuously absent.

Success or failure at transforming this area could presage how successful we can be at bringing urbanism to existing suburban areas like Tysons Corner, with its large arterials and cloverleaf intersections that planners couldn't remove or reconfigure.

Other elements of the plan may also hinder this area from fully transcending its present pedestrian-unfriendly character. Right in the middle of this walkable retail street is a break in the retail storefronts. Cars can traverse the sidewalk here to access the parking garage in the back of the project, underneath the four residential floors above. There are two other curb cuts for this parking, one on 3rd Street along the south side of the project, and the other on Chillum Place on the north side. Why couldn't all the cars enter and exit from these rear entrances? That would let Riggs, the main walkable street, maintain continuous storefronts and minimize conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians.

Finally, I wonder if we couldn't have broken up this parcel with new neighborhood streets. All of the blocks remain large, and small blocks are one of the most important factors contributing to walkability. The residential developments in the southeast don't appear to front on any streets at all, creating a bit of a "towers in the park" dynamic. And the back of the development is clearly a "back," with just the wall of the parking garage and no street engagement. At the moment, that's not a big deal, since there are only low, warehouse-style buildings across the street. But one day, others might redevelop those parcels, only they'll forever face the back of this development.

Despite these potential flaws, it'll bring major improvements to the area. While Brookland, Takoma, and others have seen development (and development controversies) in their underutilized land around their Metro stations, economic development has thus far passed Fort Totten by. As the only DC transfer station outside downtown, this area lead the city in transit-oriented development, not lag far behind.

29 comments

Tags: DC, development, Fort Totten, pedestrians, retail, TOD, walkability

Key Fort Totten intersection to get 3/4 better (Dec 1, 2009)
DDOT will reexamine Fort Totten no-people zone (Dec 14, 2009)
Pictures of Fort Totten's no-people zone (Dec 4, 2009)
Fort Totten streets get a little closer to complete (Mar 23, 2010)
Fort Rotten design (Jun 2, 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 »

Is there any connection to the Fort Totten Metro station?

by Jasper on Jan 26, 2009 3:20 pm • link • report

This is a step in the right direction. The single new apartment complex that's right next to Fort Totten is looking a little lonely right now.

by Cavan on Jan 26, 2009 3:21 pm • link • report

Semantics, I know, but RFK Stadium is also a transfer point outside downtown DC

by MPC on Jan 26, 2009 3:29 pm • link • report

Maybe I should have said the Metro system's only four-track station outside downtown?

by David Alpert on Jan 26, 2009 3:34 pm • link • report

apropos of nothing, it would appear that you've found the limit of the new imagery that google added for DC last week. note that the trees are leaf-on south and east of riggs, and leaf-off north and west...imagery from different times of the year stitched together here.

by IMGoph on Jan 26, 2009 3:39 pm • link • report

This is a start. Pedestrians don't walk in this area because there is limited population density and limited destinations. It's a suburban like area given the residential housing density, and for this to change, there needs to be an overall change in the development pattern for the areas that are undeveloped and/or able to be repurposed since for the most part, extant residentially developed land cannot change (apartments can, single family owner occupied homes typically cannot).

So like there is a planning process for urban design and transportation matters wrt North Capitol and Irving Streets, there should be a broader Fort Totten urban design study. I guess there is: http://www.planning.dc.gov/planning/cwp/view,a,1285,q,645648.asp

I don't know how wide ranging it is as I haven't read it and lack the time to do so... But in some respects, it's too late, since much of the land around Ft. Totten has been developed already, or plans have been approved (i.e., the apartments-condos built immediately adjacent.

But to complement this proposal, you could also re-plan the entrance way into the Metro station, 1st Place NE (there are a couple Union buildings, a church, a WMATA building, and a parking lot) and make it more urban too. I.e., imagine if there was a diner and some other things going on at Fort Totten... then it could become an activity center in its own right and safer (my bike seat got stolen here once) with more positive activity throughout the day.

by Richard Layman on Jan 26, 2009 3:57 pm • link • report

I've never gotten off the train at Ft. Totten, so I'd love to hear from others who have, but ... from the satellite shots, it looks like the entire station should be moved about a block north, because there's some kind of industrial facility blocking anyone from exiting to the south. Is that the case? I don't know how expensive that would be, but it seems like a useful part of the equation for figuring out how to make the area more walkable.

by tom veil on Jan 26, 2009 4:49 pm • link • report

Tom V., I have used the Ft. Totten stop more times than I wish. I hate this stop. It's so pedestrian unfriendly. You have to dodge cars and busses. It's a wasteland. There is no place to get a drink of water in the summer, like a water fountain or a little store to buy something. Its a long walk to a shop like that from the train stop.

There are a bunch of busses that stop at Ft. T. These busses, at least the ones I need, make detours from their routes in order to stop/terminate at Ft. Totten. If the bus would just continue north/south w/o making this stop I wouldn't need to get off at Ft. Totten. I would just take the bus and skip the train. The k6 departs each half hour only to 8:30 am. Then it's once an hour. The restrooms at the train station are not readily accessed. There's no shade. There's no water. It's hell waiting there in the summer heat.

Once last summer when the heat index was 105 d.F i walked till I came to a shaded stop to await the next bus. I got yelled at by the bus driver b/c i wasn't boarding at the Ft. totten stop w/ my transfer. I pointed out the lack of shade and water and the heat and he proceeded the few blocks to my destination. Why oh why does every bus route terminate at the awful Ft. Totten? can't i please just get on a bus in Col. Hts that goes up NH Ave to Eastern ave? Why must i instead ride the train to FT. Totten only to wait for the once an hour bus to get the last mile to my destination?

There is so much room to improve the Ft. Totten stop AND the bus service north of Ft. Totten.

My other experience is picking up passengers at the kiss-n-ride at Ft. totten in my car. Again, they have to cross lanes of cars and busses to get to the spot. It's terrible. I use Ft. Totten but I don't like it.

by Bianchi on Jan 26, 2009 5:18 pm • link • report

Good comment about the too-wide roadways. The planned intersection of South Dakota and Riggs is just ridiculously oversized. I'm sure the traffic models insisted it was necessary.

And what's happening on the south corner? Just another nonfunctional green buffer wasting space for another 50 years?

by Laurence Aurbach on Jan 26, 2009 5:20 pm • link • report

They need to re-name the waste transfer station. It's like the "Lorton" problem (or the "Walpole" problem if you're from Massachusetts). Lorton and Walpole are infamous prisons named after the towns where they are located -- bad idea, because you can't think of one without the other. Same for the Ft. Totten waste transfer station and its surrounding neighborhood and metro station. I imagine that if I got off at Ft. Totten metro station that I'd walk into a giant trash heap.

One day when I did get off there to take a bus to Providence Hospital I almost gagged on the bus fumes and the location was unsightly and depressing.

Let's rename it the Richard Bruce Cheney Transfer Station and turn Ft. Totten into a densely settled, pedestrian-friendly urban neighborhood.

by Ward 1 Guy on Jan 26, 2009 6:40 pm • link • report

I am pretty sure that "nonfunctional green buffer" is the site of the actual Fort Totten and it is most likely controlled by the National Park Service.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Totten,_Washington,_D.C.

http://dekester.home.mindspring.com/totten.htm

http://www.nps.gov/archive/rocr/ftcircle/totten.htm

by JMG on Jan 26, 2009 9:11 pm • link • report

I'd like to see Metro and the city be smarter about the land they have near Metro stations. Instead of selling the ``unused public land (???)'' to a developer for a one-time gain, the city should have instead given it to Metro, and then Metro would lease the land to the developers for 99 years. In this way, the land is still put to good use and the transit system gets revenue every year for the next century, and beyond.

by Cary O'Reilly on Jan 26, 2009 9:54 pm • link • report

Great point about public land, there should be a more fair way (from the citizen/taxpayer standpoint) to re-purpose the space. In this time of diminishing budgets and services, a lease-let or partnership could have a more useful and long term positive impact for the public than the onetime gain of selling the land for peanuts.

by David Fabian on Jan 26, 2009 10:51 pm • link • report

Cary, I understand and agree that the District should not dispose of its public land by selling it in sweetheart deals with favored developers, and this is particularly problematic for land that the District is likely to need to provide necessary public services in the future. However, I am confused by your recommendation that, instead of selling their land to favored developers, the DC taxpayers should donate their land to WMATA. I also suggest that you dig a little deeper into the implications of 99 year leases. IT is not the panacea that you might anticipate.

by Andy on Jan 26, 2009 11:01 pm • link • report

Fort Totten is also a potential site for a commuter rail station.

by Alfred Carr on Jan 26, 2009 11:21 pm • link • report

The south corner is definitely not the site of Fort Totten. The fort site is west of the Metro station.

by Laurence Aurbach on Jan 27, 2009 9:48 am • link • report

I love how the rendering shows all the trees conveniently shaped so they don't block any of the signage or the streetlights. Uh...it'll take 10 years of growth and VERY careful pruning to get that look.

by woodsider on Jan 27, 2009 9:59 am • link • report

Andy, land leases work great in the U.K. and elsewhere. There is no doubt that D.C. residents would benefit from development of the land, and the district has a stake in making sure Metro has the funding it needs to operate. Giving the land to Metro and allowing Metro to lease it (NOT sell it) would achieve both goals. I will do more research, as you suggest, but it seems a win-win to me.

by Cary O'Reilly on Jan 27, 2009 10:38 am • link • report

DC Office of Planning is completing a small area plan that attempts to create a 100% corner at Riggs & South Dakota. However, the traffic engineering disallows a pedestrian crossing on the west leg of Riggs Road -- the closest to the street that leads to the Fort Totten Metro station. The reason? Left turning vehicles from S. Dakota. I understand that DDOT also resisted allowing on-street parking on S. Dakota (signed for 25 mph, but currently clocking 40 mph+ according to DDOT's own speed study). Note that DCOP, DDOT & WMATA allowed Clark development to not build through 3rd Street at the Metro parcel in front of the Metro entrance. It's still blocked even though development proposals showed the public paper street built through.

by Cheryl Cort on Jan 27, 2009 10:40 am • link • report

cheryl: i don't understand—there are lots of places in the city where there are crosswalks located where cars can make a left-hand turn. what makes this intersection unique?

by IMGoph on Jan 27, 2009 10:46 am • link • report

my first cynical guess as to why the ped crossing is blocked at Riggs and S. DK for left-turning cars is due to brown-nosing the Maryland car communters.

by Bianchi on Jan 27, 2009 11:29 am • link • report

That would be a real shame because that is not a very significant commuter artery. Heading into the District, Riggs Road drops from four lanes to two. It then increases farther down towards South Dakota but the bottleneck is more than enough to discourage car commuters. Also, it is not very convenient to go down Riggs Road from the Beltway. The bulk of the car traffic from Maryland comes from outside the Beltway. On the North/Northeastern side of the MD suburbs, most of the traffic uses 16th St., Georgia Ave, North Capitol (after cutting over from Georgia), Rhode Island, and New York Avenues.

by Cavan on Jan 27, 2009 11:33 am • link • report

And wouldn't it be great if more of those car commuters on Riggs just turned into the Ft. Totten metro and took the train the rest of the way?. Although getting from NE to NW is AWFUL by transit (see my complaints above)-perhaps many of the car commuters on Riggs will take the Purple line!

by Bianchi on Jan 27, 2009 11:48 am • link • report

The area south of Ft Totten Metro is not "non-functional." It is a park with a paved path going through it that is heavily used by pedestrians traveling to and from the metro from the direction of North Capitol Street. It is also the site of a community garden.

by Sarah on Jan 27, 2009 11:33 pm • link • report

Cary, I am still confused as to why you think that DC taxpayers should donate any of their scarce publicly-owned land to WMATA, especially since the formula already has DC paying a disproportionate share of WMATA's costs. I agree with you: we shouldn't be selling our land to favored developers at bargain basement prices, sometimes with additional tax subsidies, but we also shouldn't be giving it away.

by Andy on Jan 28, 2009 8:56 am • link • report

I lived in Fort Totten for a few months before finding a place of my own down in the SE. After spending a few months in the SE, I must say I'm itching to move back up to Fort Totten! Fort Totten is a great place to be, it's quiet, safe (compared to other parts of DC/MD, especially my new place in the SE), and it's got amazing potential being on 3 major metro lines. The complex across from the station is still relatively reasonably priced, though I'm sure that will go up if this development proceeds and flourishes. I would caution people about being too ambitious however, as the neighborhood is primarily composed of retired school teachers and middle-class families who won't easily give up their quiet suburban neighborhood for some booming Silver City-esque style urbana drawing all the yuppies like me to add clutter and "chaos" to the area... I hope that whatever is done, is done quickly and in the best interest of those who use metro and pedestrian venues for travel. I also hope that planners try to keep the area rent affordable--that's a huge problem in DC--all the safe vibrant areas are beyond reasonable affordability (and I make $42k/year!).

by Matthew on Jan 28, 2009 11:50 am • link • report

I have lived in this area for years and it is a major waste of space. It is so close to downtown (just a few metro stops from Union Station and Capitol Hill) and could provide great, affordable living for middle-income residents. However, many people will not live in this area for two main reasons. First, there is a huge dearth of basic shopping resources (grocery store, CVS, etc). Second (and most importantly), the crime here is horrible and the area is generally very unsafe. Riggs Park is just as bad as Anacostia and the surrounding areas aren't much better. There are some cute little neighborhoods, but the gang and drug activity just make them unlivable. Just walking out of Ft. Totten you put your life at risk. Muggings are common place and are getting more violent by the day. The drug activity is so pervasive and wide-spread that the local police really can't do anything about it. Shootings over the past few years have increased, despite some promising development.

The bottom line is that until DC's elected officials get serious about cleaning up the crime in this area (which may necessitate bringing in the FBI and DEA), nothing will change.

by Liz on Jul 13, 2009 9:04 am • link • report

Not sure about crime in this area being so terrible--check out http://www.crimereports.com/ for a specific address and compare to a different address you have a feel for.

by Nikos on Sep 28, 2009 7:52 am • link • report

Interesting comment about crime in the area. I've lived in Riggs Park off of S.Dakota Ave and Riggs Road for 14 years. Some of the reasons that I bought my home here include the low crime stats, quiet suburban atmosphere, and accessibility to Downtown DC -- my job is in the DC Convention Center area.

No issues walking my dog for the last 10 years at 5:30 am or now, power walking with a neighbor from 6am until 7am. My work hours are crazy and I routinely get home anytime between 6pm and Midnight with few problems except traffic congestion resulting from the little league football/softball games at LaSalle football field.

The biggest downfall for this community, though, is the lack of amenities within walking distance. Once those developments proposed for S.Dakota and Riggs get underway, I imagine that our quiet neighborhood will flourish.

by DeeDee DuBois on Oct 2, 2009 9:41 am • link • report