- Buildings associated with specific events that have made a contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
- Buildings that illustrate the initial development of the apartment movement as it relates to the need for housing, including the introduction of the building type and the specific form seen.
- Buildings that are parts of clusters, corridors, or districts that illustrate the patterns of development of the city.
- Buildings that reflect economic forces, both external and internal, that altered the development of the city.
- Buildings that reflect trends in the attitude toward the stratification or segregation and integration of religious, racial, economic, or other social groups through the building’s residential character, architectural form, and/or location.
- Buildings that are parts of corridors or zones that illustrate changes in zoning and planning trends and specific regulations.
Saturday, October 24, 2015
St. James Mutual Homes Designated Historic
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Apartment Sale Activity Picking Up
| Capitol Park Tower |
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Small Area Plan to Move Forward, KIPP Plan Stalls
Friday, March 15, 2013
Rock & Roll Marathon Road Closures Tomorrow
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Planning for a Complete Street on M Street
(This post is an abbreviated version of the South by West article that will appear in December's Hill Rag).
Over the past several months, DDOT has been working on a transportation planning study of the M Street, SE/SW corridor. The study area includes most of ANC 6D, which includes everything south of the Southeast/Southwest Freeway to the Washington Channel and Anacostia River. The study began in early 2012 and after three community meetings and months of study by DDOT and their consultant CH2MHILL, three alternatives were developed for the corridor and surrounding streets. Each of the alternatives are distinct, although some aspects of each alternative are common.
The first alternative would remake M Street as a “Main Street” which would accommodate more transit service. Under this alternative, there would be a median of variable width, including a center turn lane on the Southwest portion of M Street, two travel lanes on each side of the street, and the outer lanes would be an exclusive transit lane for streetcars, Metrobus, and commuter buses. Street parking that currently exists on M Street would be removed under this scenario since the parking lane would be taken up by the transit lane. Right turns would be restricted to certain intersections throughout the corridor so the transit vehicles are able to travel more quickly on the street. In order to compensate for the removal of a traffic lane on M Street, a second travel lane would be added to each side of I Street by removing on-street parking. The bike lane configuration currently on I Street would change to include a mixed travel and bike lane in each direction. In addition, P Street would be widened from one travel lane to two travel lanes between 4th Street and South Capitol Street during peak hours. One-way traffic on some streets would be converted to two-way streets.
Under the second alternative, or the “Balanced Linkages” scenario, M Street would accommodate cars, transit, and bike lanes. The typical cross-section of M Street west of South Capitol Street would have an eight-foot cycle track, an eight-foot parking lane, a 12-foot shared travel lane for general purpose and transit vehicles, and an 11-foot travel/turn lane in each direction. This scenario reduces the number of travel lanes from three currently to two lanes in each direction on M Street. Streetcar service would be placed along I Street, where the parking lane would be removed and replaced with a shared vehicle/transit lane. The streetcar line would connect to 7th Street on the western side. On-street parking on P Street would be removed as well, replaced with a shared travel/transit lane that would serve the DC Circulator (assuming service is restored to Southwest). No Southwest streets would be converted to two-way streets under the second alternative.
Alternative number three, or the “Mobility Arterial” scenario would make M Street three travel lanes in each direction with the outer lane serving as a shared travel/transit lane. Streetcars would run on this shared lane. No parking would be provided on M Street under this scenario. However, the middle travel lane would be shared with bicycles. The current configuration of I Street would not change under this scenario. Similar to alternative number two, no Southwest streets would be converted to two-way streets under the third alternative.
The full report can be found here. Comments will be accepted by DDOT until Friday, November 30 at 5pm. Comments should be emailed to ddot.awi@dc.gov, mailed to Colleen Hawkinson, District Department of Transportation, Suite 500, 55 M Street SE, Washington DC 20003 or faxed to her attention at 202-671-0617.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Improving Play Areas for SW Youth
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Southwest For Sale!
Monday, April 2, 2012
100th Anniversary of Titanic Tragedy
Thursday, January 12, 2012
M Street Transportation Study Kick-Off Meeting
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
PAT's Final Report Released on Buzzard Point
- Increase the quality and accessibility of the Buzzard Point waterfront, while recognizing its distinctive character.
- Improve pedestrian and bicycle linkages through the area and to the water along P Street and 2nd Street.
- Preserve and upgrade existing affordable housing in area.
- Make the South Capitol Street oval a major gateway to the District, creating an iconic building on the adjacent Steuart site.
- Strengthen Potomac Avenue as the link between the area and the Southeast waterfront.
- Ensure that development of the Akridge site maximizes connectivity and economic benefits to the Buzzard Point community.
- Change the proposed streetcar alignment to better serve the Buzzard Point area.
- Develop a long-range strategy for the PEPCO property, including ultimate reuse of the historic power plant building for cultural or educational use.
Rendering of Buzzard Point neighborhood courtesy of Akridge.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
PAT Recommends Buzzard Point Should Be Primarily a Residential Neighborhood
On Saturday I attended a meeting where the American Planning Association’s Planning Assistance Team (PAT) presented their results of a four-day study of Buzzard Point. Once the slide show presentation from the meeting is released, I’ll provide a link. In the meantime, here are my notes from the meeting:Buzzard Point is a separate neighborhood from the Capitol Riverfront or Southwest Waterfront, with distinct opportunities and constraints. The PAT recommends that Buzzard Point become a primarily residential mixed-use neighborhood of varying density with improved access to the waterfront. The existing public housing in the northern part of the area should be preserved and upgraded. There are nine major points about the current condition of Buzzard Point that need to be considered when planning for the future, including:
- Much of the area is low & medium density affordable housing.
- There is limited accessibility to and from Buzzard Point.
- Fort McNair acts as a wall.
- River access is blocked.
- The area is flanked by a major sports entertainment district and a large retail center under construction at Waterfront Station.
- There is a huge amount of development occurring to the east of Buzzard Point.
- There are poor multimodal connections to the area.
- Industrial uses in the area aren’t conducive to residential development.
- The Pepco power plant is an impediment.
However, there are some transformative events that will occur over the next 15 years that will have an impact on development in Buzzard Point. The DC Streetcar project will bring streetcars to Buzzard Point; the Coast Guard will relocate to St. Elizabeth’s in Southeast; South Capitol Street and bridge will be rebuilt; and there will be new waterfront connections. Since these events will take a long time to happen, change in the area will be incremental. Following is an analysis of how the planners think different sections of Buzzard Point should be developed:
2nd Street
The Anacostia Riverwalk should be extended from Buzzard Point to M Street via 2nd Street. The historic SW Community House on 2nd Street should be restored as a museum or café.
Potomac Avenue
Potomac Avenue should be extended westward to 2nd Street. Since the road extension will reach the entrance to Fort McNair on 2nd Street, mixed-use development could happen along that stretch which would support the military base, including a retail node. In keeping with L’Enfant’s street grid plan for the city, triangle parks should be created where the diagonal Potomac Avenue crosses east-west and north-south streets.
Since the distance between the Southwest Waterfront and Nationals Park is only a half mile along P Street, a pedestrian link should be maintained along this street. The PAT recommends that the proposed streetcar alignment along M Street be changed so that the transit line turns south from M Street to 1st Street, SE, then turn down Potomac Avenue until its new terminus at 2nd Street, SW, then turn north on 2nd until P Street, west on P until 4th Street, then north on 4th until it reaches the Waterfront-SEU Metro station at 4th & M Street. The new alignment would better connect Buzzard Point with the rest of the Capitol Riverfront and Southwest Waterfront.
The Waterfront
Once the Coast Guard vacates its headquarters building for St. Elizabeth’s, the building, along with Jemal’s building, which is visible along the waterfront as you cross the South Capitol Street bridge, should be purchased by the District government and transformed to a mix of open space and limited redevelopment. This is one of the more ambitious aspects of the PAT’s plans because it involves the District spending a large sum of money acquiring these sites, but the current buildings block access to the waterfront and redevelopment would open up a lot of space. Also, the city could recover part or all of the cost of acquisition through the sales of development rights to other parcels in the District. As an aside, a representative from Monday Properties, the Coast Guard’s current landlord, stated that the likelihood of the headquarters building being demolished in the next 15-20 years was slim to none, so this aspect of the plan may take longer to fulfill. Some ideas for the waterfront range from providing large parks along the river to creating marinas framed by housing (an example being the Pier Homes along the Inner Harbor in Baltimore).
If Akridge’s 100 V Street project is developed as planned, the PAT thinks it would be a major missed opportunity for the area. An alternative would be to build medium-density housing developed in partnership with the federal government for military families and/or new federal government hires. The northern part of the site could support 2-3-story buildings, while taller 5-6-story buildings could be developed closer to the waterfront.
South Capitol Street Oval and Steuart Site
Great care should be given to the planned traffic oval at the intersection of South Capitol Street and Potomac Avenue. The oval will be 7-acres, but if DDOT doesn’t properly design it to accommodate pedestrians, the result could be a large hole in the urban fabric of the community. The area at the terminus of South Capitol Street where the street meets the river (also known as the Steuart site) should have a major iconic cultural attraction…a la Sydney Opera House. The site should be engaging from the water side (perhaps with a grand staircase like the Lincoln Memorial) as well as on its land side facing the traffic oval.
Pepco
The District should work with Pepco to gradually shrink the footprint used for electrical generation consistent with sound energy practices. As properties become available, they should be developed for uses compatible with housing. Once the power plant building is decommissioned, it should be redeveloped as a low-impact attraction like a museum, gallery, etc. An example given by the PAT was the Tate Modern in London.
Once the presentation is available online, the PAT will allow public comments on their plans, so they can produce a final report in February or March of next year. Above is a map I made of Buzzard Point showing where the planners recommend changes in the area.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
National Marathon Route to Change

Update: Lou Holder from the Greater Washington Sports Alliance tells Southwest...TLQTC the following:
Our technical team is currently assessing the 9th St construction project and is devising several alternatives. We don’t anticipate any delays in our permit process as we are working closely with public safety officials to find a solution that works for everyone. Our goal has always been strong jurisdictional support, community engagement, and effective communication to ensure a safe and enjoyable event.




