Citizen Comments from Second Workshop
Group Number Two – Public Realm
Facilitator: Carol Ann Perovshek Recorder: Jackie Barton
Note: Because the diagrams illustrating the three alternatives did not indicate open space, many participants did not feel they could answer the prescribed questions. Instead they made general comments related to the public realm.
Question: In Alternative I (the linear alternative) 7th and 9th streets will provide the stage for public life in the neighborhood. Strengths? Downsides?
Strengths:
- Rhode Island Avenue is a barrier now; Alt I would provide a connection
- Connectivity; can run multiple errands easily
- Uses existing transportation structure; could be commuter walking area
- Connects to U Street
- Need better uniformity of walking experience and moving by bus, Metro, bike, etc. (plus signage). This alternative is coordinated and draws you through
- Easier for visitors to see what’s there and to traverse
- Better pedestrian safety, especially at Rhode Island Avenue
Downsides:
- May add auto traffic
- Potential parking issues
- New sidewalks on 9th Street are narrow and may not accommodate increased pedestrians
- Will businesses be that fluid without high degree of control? Difficult, but ideal.
General Comments:
- Look at Rhode Island Avenue. It is a major road with safety and pedestrian issues. May be fourth zone with crossings, etc. Better sidewalks.
- Triangular parks are good opportunity for parks, etc.
Question: In Alternative II (the nodal alternative) there would be an opportunity to develop activity areas centered around a common public space or pedestrian mall that could become gathering places. Strengths? Downsides?
Strengths:
- We’re sort of here now with Shaw segmented by Rhode Island Avenue
- More realistic; could be a step to Alternative I
- Creates buzz in nodes and eventually will have enough activity to get to Alternative I (linear)
- One-stop shopping
Downsides:
- This would take 20 to 30 years to develop. Neighborhood isn’t ready
- Need to connect east-west to Logan Circle
- Breaks things up with some retail mixed in
- Parking issues, especially next to Convention Center (Same area is part of node)
- Noise level for some areas (next to Convention Center) is problematic
- Lack of consideration
Question: In Alternative III ( the dispersed alternative) public activities would be more local. Strengths? Downsides?
Downsides:
- Where has this worked? Brooklyn, dense places.
General Comments:
- 9th Street needs commercial focus, especially north end
- Need bike lanes and parking
Question: From the perspective of the public realm, which of the alternatives do you prefer?
- Alternative I – 12
- Alternative II – 1
- Alternative III - 2
Question: In Alternative I (the linear alternative) 7th and 9th streets will provide the stage for public life in the neighborhood. Strengths? Downsides?
Question: In Alternative II (the nodal alternative) there would be an opportunity to develop activity areas centered on a common public space or pedestrian mall that could become gathering places. Strengths? Downsides?
Downsides:
- No emphasis on giving all a fair share. This doesn’t address the whole neighborhood. We should spend the same on residential blocks as commercial blocks (to protect/build character)
Question: In Alternative III ( the dispersed alternative) public activities would be more local. Strengths? Downsides?
Strengths:
- Everyone gets some benefit
Downsides:
- In terms of public expenditure, there’s a lot of spread. No concentrated improvement
- Little sense of place. There is a little any where
General Comments:
- Need more than retail in “public realm”: schools, parks, etc. in these concepts
- No equal sharing of resources in all three alternatives. Government services, etc. need to be spread around the neighborhood. Churches, parks, schools should be all along corridors
- Should encourage residents to be active and to care for public spaces. Looking just at 7th and 9th streets makes others miss real benefits
- None of the alternatives deal with green space, recreation centers, etc.
- Need overlay to show how the missing public places relate to retail, housing, etc.
- Doesn’t streetscape depend on what goes there?
- In regard to the O Street Market/Giant, with ugly parking lot, how do you address that discrepancy?
- Focusing commercial in nodal/linear will minimize public use there
- Need focus on New Jersey. It is a special community-focused place
- No hub for Shaw (in any of the three plans) from which all elements flow
- If Alternatives I and II lead to spending more money on areas than developers will spend, it will be a disaster.
- O Street Market, Kennedy Recreation Center and P Street corridor offer chance to create a hub.
- Need better public realm information on maps
- Node looks like precursor to linear. In linear alternative public resources are focused north-south on linear areas.
Question: From the perspective of the public realm, which of the alternatives do you prefer?
Question: In Alternative I (the linear alternative) 7th and 9th streets will provide the stage for public life in the neighborhood. Strengths? Downsides?
Question: In Alternative II (the nodal alternative) there would be an opportunity to develop activity areas centered around a common public space or pedestrian mall that could become gathering places. Strengths? Downsides?
Question: In Alternative III ( the dispersed alternative) public activities would be more local. Strengths? Downsides?
Strengths:
General Comments:
- In Power Point nothing said on schools/parks, etc. To invest major dollars without focus on this is wasteful
- Margaret Cooper, Carter G. Woodson, etc. – many parks
- Inviting and safe looking is important. Example: robberies near Shaw Junior High facilitated by streetscape/lot layouts, look and feel
- All three alternatives require developers to put in public spaces when they build, especially with density (ie. a green dot for every yellow one)
- Setbacks, open space required for new developments
- Where feasible, implement little DCPD offices/hubs in public spaces
- We’re really mid town. Rhode Island Avenue: library, senior center, Metro access, YMCA … we need the public space and DCPD substations. Lighting concerns (example: skate ramp)
- We need our valuable public resources maintained and upgraded
- Plans go with existing stuff. The big “missing” area on north 9th Street may be an opportunity with the rebuilding of Shaw Junior High School. Make area more manageable.
- Like dispersed and clustered commercial/residential with random placement of public spaces. If you plan commercial/residential, public space will disperse around it.
- Connect full length of 7th Street into downtown and up to Howard University.
- New York plazas with setbacks are windswept and need to be reconfigured.
- Sidewalk/street services … newspaper kiosks
- 7th, 9th and 11th streets [should be] pedestrian and mixed-use, not like New York Avenue.
- Need areas to enjoy activities (examples: electricity in parks for events, special events, programming in parks)
- Lack of development = lack of awareness. Need signage (”Welcome to Shaw”). No visual indication of bike traffic, way finding (for library, hospital, etc.) on main thoroughfares.
- There are a number of neighborhoods within what we’ve called “Shaw”. Can we go back to old neighborhoods within this?
- We are not proactive with our public spaces. We must maintain them. Why respond to lack of safety instead of preventing with good design/PD presence?
- Challenge is both streetscape and “grand” scale of avenues. Rhode Island Avenue is main barrier now. How can they work together better?
- Pedestrian issues: important that neighborhood is not just for commuters to pass through.
- We need to maintain what open space we have
Question: From the perspective of the public realm, which of the alternatives do you prefer?
