Posts about Suburban Sensibility

Development

The Wheaton library should be in downtown Wheaton

by Cavan Wilk   •   April 20, 2009 10:03 am

The draft for the new Wheaton Sector Plan currently includes provisions to build a new library in downtown Wheaton. The new library would replace the current Wheaton library which, oddly, is not in downtown Wheaton.

Rather, it is north of downtown Wheaton, on the corner of Arcola Avenue and Georgia Avenue. Though the current library is a fifteen minute walk north of the Wheaton Metro, its pedestrian-hostile configuration and pedestrian-hostile place discourage walking.

Moving the library to a more transit-rich, centrally located site in downtown Wheaton would both improve the accessibility of the library and the social and economic vitality of the existing walkable urban downtown. The other walkable urban downtowns in Montgomery County such as Bethesda, Silver Spring, Rockville, and Takoma Park have libraries at their walkable centers.

Nevertheless, a number of "don't move the library" signs have started appearing in Wheaton. Why would they want to save it?

The current Wheaton library is very suburban and hostile to pedestrians. It's not in downtown Wheaton. It's past where the walkable urban town ends and becomes car-dependent suburbia. The cars travel faster on Georgia Avenue there than in Wheaton proper. It's really hard to cross Georgia Avenue at Arcola Avenue.

The main entrance opens up to the parking lot, which is behind the building, away from the sidewalk. The secondary entrance does not open up to the narrow sidewalk on Georgia Avenue. Rather, it is behind some bushes and a drop-off and pick-up driveway for cars. It was constructed in 1962, remodeled in 1985, and designed to be by the car, of the car, and for the car, like most buildings built during those time periods.

Parking

Olde Towne Gaithersburg: He who hesitated was lost

by Cavan Wilk   •   April 13, 2009 2:24 pm

During the now-defunct credit bubble, legacy walkable urban places in Montgomery County enjoyed renovation and investment unparalleled in decades. Silver Spring received a brand new commercial development that catalyzed a better reputation and increased foot traffic. Investment in Bethesda accelerated beyond its already fast pace. Wheaton got a renovated mall and new residential development for the first time in decades. Takoma Park saw an increase in property values and commercial vitality.

Most dramatically, downtown Rockville recognized that its experiment with 20th century-style "urban renewal" was a miserable failure and restored a human-scale street grid while providing incentives for walkable urban development in its Metro-adjacent location. The only legacy downtown that didn't get in on the action was Gaithersburg, whose historic downtown is known as Olde Towne Gaithersburg. According to the Gazette, Gaithersburg is now seeking advice from developers how to revitalize their downtown.

Most of the land within the corporate limits of Gaithersburg currently sits underneath car-dependent suburban sprawl built between the 1970s and the 1990s. However, Gaithersburg was once a major agricultural stop on the B&O Railroad, whose tracks share a right-of-way with the Metro Red Line between Silver Spring and Union Station. Consequently, Gaithersburg possesses a walkable, urban historic downtown with a human-scale street grid. However, preexisting suburban sensibilities blocked new investment during the development boom years of the middle of this decade:

"We didn't build anything," said Councilman Henry F. Marraffa Jr., pointing to meticulous planning rules, political intractability and overconfidence among city leaders who he says "placed too many conditions" on projects. The city now has more than 4,000 apartments, condos, townhouses and single-family homes approved to be built, but many are years from development, he said.

Marraffa sat on a previous council that in 2001 passed a first-ever moratorium on residential development, designed to last one year, citing a need to review the city's master plan. Developers and schools added capacity elsewhere. Now the city is looking to developers to learn how to lure builders during the recession and lending crisis.

Parking minimums are another specific example of suburban sensibilities that are currently stifling growth:

Malcolm Van De Reit, a former developer with JPI and now president of White Oak Properties in McLean, Va., cited three other obstacles to Olde Towne development. He said parking ratios tied to new projects should be reduced; land assemblage for large projects is challenging in part because of landowners' expectations on pricing; and city leaders must be sensitive to the changing economy and developers' need to be cost-conscious.

"Most developers right now are going back to basics, so they're not going to be moving too far out of their comfort zones as far as spending a lot of money on ... bells and whistles," Van De Reit said.

An existing parking ordinance does not reflect an urban model or the way apartment communities operate. It asks developers to build parking and has caused some projects to crumble under their own weight or lose financing through delays in planning processes, he said.

As Mr. Van De Reit said, parking minimums provide a sizable disincentive to a developer who wishes to invest in an urban-friendly project. Without new investment, a city or town stagnates and declines. That is exactly what happened in our major cities, including Washington, DC, from World War II to the end of the century. Hindsight has taught us that preventing all development is just as destructive in the long term as promoting poorly planned development.

Olde Towne Gaithersburg, like every walkable urban place in the region and the United States, needs to adopt a zoning and planning framework that makes sense in a human-scale environment. Gaithersburg already has neighboring communities in its own county to learn from. Neighboring Rockville would be an excellent place to start due to proximity, similar demographics, and similar infrastructure, though without a Red Line Station. Like Rockville, as an incorporated town, Gaithersburg has more control over land use planning. Unincorporated Wheaton, Silver Spring, and Bethesda are all governed and planned at the county level.

It's one thing for a dedicated livable/walkable communities and mass transit activist to suggest such a course of action. The point is driven home even more acutely when members of the business community say the same thing:

Developers have suggested a more flexible ordinance in Olde Towne, "an urban model," used in downtown Rockville or Bethesda, Van De Reit said. The current requirement forces structured or partially below-grade parking at costs not justified by Gaithersburg rents.

While seeking feedback from developers can be a positive part of the process, as Richard Layman says, a request for proposals isn't a plan. There's no subsitute for a carefully crafted plan that combines ideas from planners, developers and residents. Gaithersburg should bear that in mind as it moves forward with much-needed planning to leverage its most valuable asset.

Pedestrians

It takes a village: why walkable urbanism is good for adolescents

by Cavan Wilk   •   March 2, 2009 10:51 am

The March edition of GQ features a 12-year-old budding food critic, David Fishman of New York, NY. One of Fishman's favorite activities is to visit local restaurants and write critiques. Due to his age, his parents limit him to restaurants within walking distance in his Upper West Side neighborhood. While such parental ground rules would amount to house arrest for children in car-dependent subdivisions, it provides David with a balance between safety and freedom while leaving plenty of restaurant options.

In conventional suburban neighborhoods, meanwhile, there is simply nowhere for a preteen or teenager can explore within walking distance. Fishman would While proponents of a car-dependent lifestyle often argue that the subdivision is a better environment for raising children, they forget that children's needs change when they become pre-teens and need to socialize and explore their surroundings. Quite simply, David would not be able to explore his passion for critiquing restaurants if he did not live in a vibrant walkable urban place.

David's story, while unique in its national magazine coverage, is not unique to the Upper West Side of Manhattan. In downtown Wheaton, pre-teens and teenagers walk around, go to and from the Metro, eat at cafes, shop at the Westfield Wheaton mall, the local comic book store, or the grocery store. In neighboring Silver Spring or Bethesda, many pre-teens and carless teenagers shop at the stores and eat at the numerous restaurants. The same scene repeats itself in Tenleytown, Friendship Heights, Georgetown, and Ballston. In these walkable places, teens can learn valuable social skills and enjoy a measure of freedom.

I spent last Thanksgiving at a friend of a friend's house. The host's parents and their friends grew up in a walkable neighborhood in Norfolk. The boys could walk to the local ball field and see who was around for a pickup game. (At that time, I guess, girls weren't welcome in the boys' pickup games). If any of the kids made a misguided, immature decision, their neighbors would walk over and tell their parents. As much as they hated it then, they now wish they had raised their children in such an environment. Their raves about the old neighborhood sounded just like my dad and my aunts describing their old neighborhood on the South Side of Pittsburgh.

Now, the host's parents own their "dream house" in a subdivision in Upper Marlboro. They can't walk over to a local field for a pick-up game. It's much harder to get to know your neighbors without a sidewalk leading to a local park or other destination where you might run into each other. If they ever saw a neighbor's child doing something they shouldn't, would they even know whom to call? It takes a village to raise a child. What happens when there is no village?

The subdivision I grew up in had a couple other kids that were in my age range. I was lucky. Outside of the subdivision, there was nothing else in walking distance. The roads to get there had no shoulder, either. As much as I liked the other guys in the subdivision, they weren't my best friends. If I wanted to see friends from school, my parents had to drive. Once again, I was lucky that my parents had time for frequent trips to friends' houses, as long as I gave them ample notice and they talked to my friends' parents. However, that's a lot of big "ifs." It's silly that a parent must devote time, energy, and money from gasoline, insurance and car depreciation every time two kids want to play video games or kick a soccer ball together.

A pick-up soccer, football, or basketball game was even more complicated. We couldn't just go down to the local field and play with whatever kids were hanging around looking for a game. Instead, we had to call guys who lived in distant subdivisions and talk to their parents about car transportation. If anyone's parents weren't around, or were too busy to take an hour out of their day to drive their child to a pick-up football game, we couldn't play. Since organizing required effort, we'd only call our friends. This deprived us and other adolescents of a major social lesson: getting along with people other than your friends.

Between college and graduate school, I taught ninth grade math. Many of my students would go home after school, fire up the video game console, eat dinner, and then play more video games until they went to bed. Would I have been any different if there weren't other kids in the subdivision, I wasn't into playing sports, or my parents couldn't drive me to the games? Obviously, there are plenty of couch potatoes around the world who do live in walkable urban places. However, without other options, children have few alternatives to a sedentary lifestyle.

Car-dependent places design each area for one single land use. They also seem to design for single life stages, too. A large yard may make sense when a child is just learning to walk. However, what happens when children outgrow the yard and want to interact with their peers and explore the world around them? While it is clearly possible to raise children who become successful adults in car-dependent places, it clearly has its shortcomings for pre-teens and carless teenagers. Why does so much "conventional wisdom" claim that suburbia is inherently a better place to raise children? Suburbia has its advantages, but also more than its fair share of shortcomings.

I'm probably going to get a lot of negative feedback in the comments for this, but I suggest that the myth about suburbia being a better environment for children arose from a combination of suburban marketing and our collective attempt to rationalize the divestment and abandonment of our cities and towns. Amazingly, our society continues to collectively embrace the idea of car-dependent suburbia being best for children while, simultaneously, the baby boomer generation pines for the walkable towns and neighborhoods of their youth.

Public Spaces

Breakfast links: More pedestrians there, more cars here

by David Alpert   •   February 27, 2009 8:58 am

Midtown Manhattan's Broadway to go pedestrian-only: Times Square and Herald Square are some of the nation's most crowded outdoor spaces. Diagonal Broadway jams up traffic on Sixth and Seventh Avenues, by taking away traffic signal time from the avenues. Yesterday, New York announced an innovative solution: close Broadway to traffic in these areas. Pedestrians may finally have enough room, and it'll actually reduce car delays. (Tips: Greater Greater Dad, Robert H.-D., Andrew K., and others.)

Go blogs! Yesterday's Broadway announcement is also a huge win for Streetsblog, the New York City Streets Renaissance Campaign, Transportation Alternatives, and other advocates who have persuaded the NYC government to completely transform its approach to transportation. A Wednesday segment about the future of news on NPR's Marketplace mentioned the rapid rise of small, online-only news operations focused on city government, local politics, and development.

T4A launches platform: The national Transportation For America coalition officially launched their platform on Capitol Hill today. It calls for this fall's transportation bill (TEA) to fund a 21st-century network that allocates transportation dollars based on objectives, like lowering carbon emissions and ensuring economic access, rather than set amounts for highways and (much smaller amounts) for transit.

PG neighbors debate highway widening, light rail: Residents of Temple Hills, Clinton and Brandywide debated widening Route 5 south of the Beltway. Some residents are eager for the widening, while others don't want the sprawl it will bring to southern Prince George's and counties to the south; some are pleased about the county's proposed light rail corridor, while others worry about the development that could result. (Gazette)

Reject a bungalow, get a skinny box: A developer built a 12-foot-wide modernist house on a lot in Arlington after neighbors rejected a zoning variance to put two bungalows in the place of one.

Up in Montgomery-land: The new Paint Branch High School in Burtonsville will be much worse for walkers (JUTP) ... The debate over Falkland Chase continues (Gazette) ... JUTP's Dan Reed and some friends encountered a Rockville leasing agent who said they "don't look like [they] could afford to live here" (Diamondback Online)

And: The Historic Preservation Review Board approved the revised design for the Whitman-Walker redevelopment project at 14th and S (CSNA) ... Metro has started layoffs (Examiner) ... the Senate passed the voting rights bill, with an amendment repealing DC's gun laws, but which will probably come out in conference. (Post, City Paper) ... The Virginia House rejected a bill to give residents the right to dry clothes on clotheslines.

Development

Designing for walkability in Fairfax and Loudoun

by David Alpert   •   February 26, 2009 3:45 pm

In a suburban context, developers tend to propose suburban designs for new development. Those designs separate buildings with large amounts of space, fill that space with empty lawns and plazas, and channel traffic to wide boulevards around the periphery of a site. These designs don't lend themselves to walkable environments with lively ground level activity.

If Northern Virginia wants its growing areas, like those along the Silver Line, to become walkable neighborhoods like Arlington, Bethesda and Silver Spring, we need to ensure that new development builds the connected street grid with small blocks common to all of those places, and even more common in older cities like DC and Old Town Alexandria. Unfortunately, many of the developments currently proposed or under construction miss this opportunity.

Last week, DCmud discussed the Towers Crescent development just south of the Tysons Corner Center mall. They have already built several office buildings on the site, and are interested in adding several residential buildings on the west edge. Residential buildings are a good idea, but unfortunately, they've designed them, along with the already-completed buildings, in a very un-urban form.

No streets stretch all the way across the site. There are pedestrian paths from one side to the other, but require people to take a circuitous route around the various and motley buildings, plazas and gardens. Nothing lines up. The mall and Marriott on either side are just as bad, but planners are trying hard to evolve Tysons into more of a walkable place. This design will hinder that evolution.

The plan reflects a "suburban sensibility", a term I first saw used in the context of the Newport development in Jersey City, right across the Hudson from Manhattan. Suburban office park developers design something for a denser, more urban place that looks like a suburban office park, but with all the buildings a little taller and a tad closer together.

Some projects are trying harder. The Connection recently profiled the Dulles World Center, a proposed "town center" style project adjacent to the Dulles Access Road at Route 28, just outside the airport property. The property is very close to the future Route 28 Silver Line station.

The developer is excited about creating a "mixed-use transit-oriented development" including residential, office, and hotels. Of course, some people don't like that idea, including Loudoun Supervisor Andrea McGimsey, who isn't pleased that the project could devote 25% of its space to residential units.

According to the Connection, the project includes "a pedestrian-friendly grid network of streets, a large central park, public plaza and ... LEED certification." The grid is more pedestrian-friendly than most, though the blocks still lean to the large side. Based on this site plan, there appear to be eleven internal intersections, or 89 per square mile. LEED-ND calls for 150 per square mile.

The project still follows the suburban "towers in the park" design, with tall buildings surrounded by a lot of open space. That's far more open space than people could actually use, meaning most of the lawns will function more as voids than parks. On the other hand, by putting the buildings along streets and more of the space in the center, they maximize the opportunities to activate the street with cafes, retail and more.

The more mixed-use TOD we can get around the Silver Line, the more riders it will have and the more we can recoup our investment in this transit line. Still, all development isn't created equal. Entirely suburban designs like Towers Crescent will hinder Tysons' progress toward a walkable place. Dulles World Center, meanwhile, jumps ahead of most of its surroundings, but would look like horrible superblocks in Arlington or DC. We can and should do even better.

Development

Fight for your right for a vibrant Wisconsin Avenue

by David Alpert   •   January 21, 2009 11:39 am

Tonight, the Cleveland Park ANC (3C) will debate the controversial Giant PUD at Idaho and Wisconsin. Both supporters and opponents of the PUD have been working to flood ANC Commissioners with letters. If you live in 3C, please email your Commissioner to ask him or her to support the Giant, and attend tonight's meeting at 7:30 at the Second District Police Station on Idaho Avenue (at Newark St) McLean Gardens Ballroom, 3811 Porter St (near Wisconsin).

Residents have been hotly debating this project on the neighborhood email list. Unlike many past debates, numerous residents have written in support of the Giant. For example, one resident wrote,

There are truly hundreds of citizens and residents of our neighborhood who, though quiet, would like nothing more than to see the new Giant store and accompanying project started and completed at the earliest possible time. We are all disgusted with the present state of Wisconsin Avenue in our neighborhood. Most of us no longer walk or shop anywhere near the area and cannot understand why or how the authorities have allowed it to be like this now for over two years. Nor do we believe the continuing professional critics of the project should be allowed still once more to succeed in getting further delays.

No project of this magnitude will or can ever be perfect or acceptable to everyone. The critics are well aware of this, but nonetheless continue with their multipronged efforts, obviously hoping to still further delay if not thwart the project altogether. Please do not let them do so again. Nothing would more demoralize the neighborhood than to see the deplorable state of that area allowed to continue for any longer than it takes for Giant to carry out its current plans.

Another resident tried to put this debate in context:

I have been in the CP neighborhood for some 42 years. During this time, I have witnessed numerous innovations that have generated great heat, some light, and usually an improved community. ...

Common to these innovations over the years were their very newness, the opposition of a small group in the community willing to turn out for meetings, the silence of the great majority in the community not attending meetings, concerns and reservations that usually have not come to fruition, and eventual acceptance resulting in community betterment.

I see the same situation with the proposed expansion of our Giant, now going into the ninth year of discussion. We hear constantly from a small group of dissidents: Cars will be speeding down my street, my basement will suffer structural damage, parking will be insufficient, it will be a destination Giant, even though there are several larger stores within two miles, and other issues you have heard and read on the ListServe.

It is time to move forward. I think the vast majority of our community wants us to move this project with all haste, even though they don't attend the meetings.

Jeff Davis, organizer of the pro-project organization Advocates of Wisconsin Avenue Renewal (AWARE), wrote,

The difference this time is that the vast "silent majority" is no longer silent. A group of neighbors has joined together to stand up to the small group of naysayers and to speak up for the Giant PUD Application.

Transit

Breakfast links: Actions for transit

by David Alpert   •   December 23, 2008 8:53 am

MoCo planning staff endorse light rail: Reports of Planning Board staff endorsing a bus Purple Line have been greatly exaggerated. A staff report released yesterday endorses the surface light rail option, including the segment parallel to the Capital Crescent Trail. "We have to grow, and we have to do it in a way that is sustainable ... in a reasonable way that is less dependent on the auto," said the report's author, Tom Autrey, according to the Post.

Sign up to testify Jan. 8: The next step is the Planning Board hearing to review this recommendation on January 8th. You can now sign up to testify, or submit written testimony to MCP-Chairman@mncppc-mc.org until January 2nd.

Save some stimulus for transit: House Transportation Chair James Oberstar is trying to ensure transit isn't forgotten in the rush-to-pork stimulus Congress is working on. Transportation For America has a petition to ask Congress to include transit for a greener stimulus. Twin Cities Streets for People created a video envisioning a future for Minneapolis after building all the freeways Minnesota DOT wants to spend their stimulus on. Via Richard Layman.

Falls Church debating suburban setbacks: Suburban zoning codes typically require large setbacks for buildings facing main streets (often to accommodate parking in front), but we've now learned that building closer to the street creates a more walkable environment. One developer is planning rental apartments and townhouses, including some affordable housing, within walking distance of downtown Falls Church and the Metro. According to DCMud, some members of the Falls Church Planning Commission "remain concerned about the developer's push for a variance that would allow them to build up to five feet from the property line, instead of the normally regulated twenty."

Yup, ugly: BeyondDC reviews the Post's list of the area's six ugliest buildings. On Georgetown's Lauinger Library, he writes, "You know that really pretty spire that's the defining landmark of Georgetown University? You know that massive concrete bunker in front of it that blocks the view of the spire from the Potomac? Yeah, good call."

Development

Walkable urbanism has arrived...

by David Alpert   •   December 9, 2008 3:20 pm

...when LEGO now sells sets to build mixed-use, street-facing model Victorian townhouses with apartments above retail.

I loved to build LEGO sets growing up, but back then, almost all LEGO sets fit into one of three lines: Castle, Space, or Town (suburban-style development). They later added Pirate. In Town, we had the gas station, airport, single-family houses, and more, all on large, green plates connected by road plates. There was a train station, of course, but the small-town commuter rail type. That was the way people saw the built environment in those days.

Today, LEGO makes a lot more (like Star Wars and SpongeBob SquarePants sets). But they've renamed Town to City. Today's City sets still mostly feature emergency response vehicles and infrastructure like ports and airports (the things kids like), but as Planetizen reports, they also now make some mixed-use urban buildings, including a green grocer with apartments above, and a corner cafe below a hotel.

Of course, LEGO is a European company, and Europe's cities have always looked like this. And they still sell the suburban gas station. Perhaps reflecting the actual value of urban buildings versus suburban, the gas station sells for $39.99 and the greengrocer for $149.99. Like real historic urban buildings compared to new suburban cookie-cutter development, the townhouse sets have much more detail. (They're also aimed at a much older audience.)

At yesterday's panel, Christopher Leinberger also talked about pop culture's reflection of urbanism versus suburbanism, using an anecdote that also appears in The Option of Urbanism. We know that our attitudes have changed, he said, because while baby boomers' TV shows depicted families in the suburbs (like The Brady Bunch and The Dick Van Dyke Show), today's the next generation's hottest sitcoms take place in cities, such as Friends and Seinfeld and many since.

In January 1957, Leinberger explained, Lucy of I Love Lucy moved from Manhattan to a suburb in Connecticut. In a subsequent episode, she had Fred and Ethel visit "to see her new suburban splendor." Then they moved out there. "The Baby Boomers' image [of cities] was Hill Street Blues and Fort Apache in the Bronx," he said. In an episode of Sex and the City, one of the characters walks down a narrow Manhattan street at night. "The boomers think she's going to get mugged. The millenials think she's going to a glamorous art gallery," which is exactly where she's going, safely.

Development

Affordable housing clashes with the suburban mindset in Wheaton/Kensington

by Cavan Wilk   •   December 1, 2008 8:30 am

The interaction of supply and demand is one of the most fundamental relationships governing prices in any kind of market. Housing prices in Montgomery County, and the Washington region as a whole, remain unaffordable for many middle-income workers.

One major reason is the simple fact that the supply of housing has not kept up with job creation and housing demand during the past two decades. That is a long time. That's a lot of unmet latent demand.

Adding more housing units will satisfy some of this latent demand, making housing less scarce, and pushing prices towards affordability.

In November, the Montgomery County Planning Board voted against approving 36 new townhouses adjacent to the Westfield Wheaton mall, a 10 minute walk from the Metro. The Planning Board sided with the neighboring Kensington Heights Citizens' Association, which vehemently fought the proposal.

They argued that it was "'incompatible' with the neighborhood." The association's president, Donna Savage, told the Gazette that "the opposition comes as much out of principle as out of concerns about traffic increases and neighborhood preservation."

What 'principle' is that? Savage was talking about the 1990 Wheaton Sector Plan, which calls for low density commercial development at this spot. However, the current Sector Plan is about to expire, and Wheaton has become more urban in 18 years.

Plus, other areas at the edge of Wheaton's CBD have similar townhouses. Is this fight really about the "principle" of sticking to obsolete zoning rules for Wheaton for just another year or two until we get a new plan? I doubt it. According to the Gazette article:

The citizens group also submitted a proposal to the county in September 2007 to have the property considered for the Legacy Open Space Program, but that request was denied.

I think this last quote says all that needs to be said about "principles." The Citizens' Association wants no new development in an urban place. No increase in housing supply. No incremental drop in housing costs.

I'm sure the Citizens' Association isn't deliberately trying to keep housing expensive. But that's an unintended consequence of imposing outdated suburban sensibilities on a community (Wheaton) that is increasingly vibrant, transit-rich, walkable, and urban.

Mehring was asking for RT-10 zoning, or 10 units per acre. The RT-10 zone requires Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs), which are reserved for qualified buyers at below-market prices. If the developer is forced to develop fewer units under the RT-6 zone (6 units per acre), as proposed by the Kensington Heights Citizens' Association, Wheaton will get zero MPDUs.

Besides adding needed market priced units and MPDUs to the county's housing stock, this project would indeed fit with the 1990 Sector Plan. Elsewhere in Wheaton, the plan places townhouses as a transition between the commercial CBD and the areas of single-family houses.

There are already townhouses on Grandview Avenue, across from the firehouse at the edge of the CBD just north of the Metro Station. There's another townhouse community on University Boulevard east of Georgia Avenue, between the Metro and the Wheaton Woods neighborhood of single-family houses. Finally, there's a large townhouse community currently under construction on the old Good Council High School site, north of the Metro on Georgia Avenue.

This site, an open 3-acre lot on University Boulevard, is a transit-rich area. Both the L7 Metrobus and the 34 RideOn routes serve University, with the 34 running all day long, seven days a week, between Wheaton and Friendship Heights via the Medical Center and Bethesda Metro stations.

Most importantly, the project site is approximately a ten minute walk from the Wheaton Metro. It is hard to find another empty site in our region that enjoys such great transit. Letting such an opportunity go to waste violates the Smart Growth policies of Montgomery County and the State of Maryland.

The proposal would have created 36 townhouses of residents who could have conveniently walked to local businesses in Wheaton, supporting Wheaton's ongoing revitalization with their hard-earned dollars. Each trip on foot would have meant less air pollution, less global warming, less dependence on foreign oil, and less traffic on the roads.

As time goes on, and gasoline prices resume their stratospheric climb, running errands without using the car will become increasingly attractive. Being free of rising gasoline prices, and all associated automotive costs, would have made the housing even more affordable.

Housing values in transit-oriented parts of the region, such as Bethesda and Silver Spring, have retained their value, despite the popping of the real estate bubble, which led to the overall sluggish housing sector. Thanks to the walkable urban form of Wheaton and its current revitalizing trajectory, these new townhouses would have enjoyed similarly stable values, like those in Silver Spring, Bethesda, Arlington along the Orange Line, Logan Circle, Dupont, and elsewhere.

The developer has resubmitted a new proposal for 27 townhouses. Despite the lower profits of 27 townhouses instead of 36, they still have a business to run and would rather earn less profit than none at all or wait years for a new Sector Plan that may well allow 36. They don't believe they can even break even with just the 18 units allowed under the current RT-6 zoning.

Affordable housing, transit access, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and vibrant walkable communities, are not going appear by magic. Instead, we'll get there through small decision after small decision adding up to something much larger. The Planning Board should take an important step toward these goals by approving the proposal (or, better yet, the original one) and getting more housing, including affordable housing, for Wheaton.

Retail

From drive-thru to walk-up: Van Ness Walgreens

by David Alpert   •   November 3, 2008 3:22 pm

When we last looked at the proposed Van Ness Walgreens at Connecticut and Veazey, it was a suburban store plunked down in an urban lot next to a Metro station. The building was set far back from Connecticut Avenue, with parking in front, curb cuts on both Connecticut and Veazey, a big free-standing sign at the corner, and a seven-car drive-thru.

DDOT and community members opposed the plan as inappropriate to the city, especially a site right near Metro. In response, Walgreens completely reworked the proposal into something that belongs on an urban street corner. Instead of siting the building at the very rear of the lot, it now comes right up to the property line along Connecticut Avenue. A few parking spaces are in the rear, off the alley, and the rest underground. There are now only three above-ground spaces instead of seven in the original plan.

The above diagrams show the original proposal (left) and the current plans (right). Areas shaded in red are part of the building, yellow are areas used by vehicles, and green are pedestrian-only walkways. As you can see, on the old plan pedestrians had to cross the parking area and potentially conflict with parking and turning vehicles. Now, pedestrians can enter the store directly from the sidewalk.

Instead of a drive-thru, the plans show a "possible walk-up window" in the rear. That would let drivers pull in from the alley, get prescriptions, and drive away. If the store is intent on building infrastructure for drivers to avoid parking underground and entering the store, that's a much better way. (They still might end up better off if they force people to actually enter the store and potentially see other items to buy, but that should be their own business decision.)

This design is a huge improvement over the original, but it's never going to become a paragon of great urbanism. As with many drugstores, it has few windows—just near the escalators, the front door, and the possible walk-up window. And unlike drugstores like CVS that have windows but the store covers them up, the building won't have them from the start. That means it'll be more expensive for another store to reuse this space for a more window-oriented storefront retail in the future. (Depending how the building is designed, it may not even be possible without structural reinforcement.)

At the moment, the design doesn't contain any bicycle parking. That's one of many concerns raised by the local ANC, as reported in last week's Current (article, continuation). The ANC's resolution also raises concerns about traffic, delivery trucks, noise from mechanical equipment, lack of vegetation, and one particular tree that screens the gas station currently on the site from a nearby apartment building.

The developer's traffic study should answer questions about the traffic impact, though I can't see it being worse than a gas station. Neighbors want Walgreens to save the existing tree, add more vegetation on the site, and enclose the mechanical equipment to cut down on noise. According to the Current, the ANC wants further concessions on these issues before it will support the variances Walgreens needs to build this more urban-friendly design.

The new design is about 1/3 bigger (20,188 square feet of retail space versus 15,071 in the original) and, if I'm counting right, has 4 more parking spaces (31 versus 27). With the larger project they're getting if granted the variance from lot coverage requirements, this project should be better for Walgreens as well as the community. It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask Walgreens to include some bike parking, landscaping, and address mechanical noise in exchange.