Programs & Events

Introduction

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am testifying on behalf of Historic Takoma, Inc., a membership-based non-profit organization founded in 1979 to promote historic preservation, citizen involvement and community development for the Takoma community in Washington, DC and Takoma Park, MD.

I am a Takoma Park, MD, resident, a regular Metro commuter, a strong proponent of smart growth, and an environmental lawyer. I worked extensively on this Plan, and represented Historic Takoma, Inc. as a member of the Citizens Working Group that was assembled by the DC Office of Planning to consult on the plan for Takoma DC. I attended virtually every meeting of the Citizens Working Group. I was the only Marylander on the working group.

On behalf of Historic Takoma, Inc., I am testifying today in opposition to the Plan as it is currently drafted. We recognize that certain portions of it are positive and might help guide the community's future revitalization. We take note of the emphasis on historic preservation in the final Plan, which Historic Takoma had urged be included in our comments on earlier drafts.

Unfortunately, however, the flaws in the current Plan are fatal flaws. As a result, it does not have our support or the support of the majority of the community either in Maryland or in D.C. This lack of support is reflected in the resolutions adopted by the Takoma Park, MD City Council and the ANC, as well as hundreds of citizens who signed petitions in opposition to the Plan.

Most important, the Plan

(1) does not provide for the community's current and future transit needs or traffic concerns in and around the Metro station, and
(2) does not recognize or address the community's current and future open space needs.

Procedural Concerns

The Small Area Planning process was initiated because the community, in both DC and Maryland, was concerned that the WMATA-owned land at the Takoma Metro station (currently a park plus transit/parking area for the station) was going to be sold for development. WMATA put the land up for sale without any warning to the residents who had fought so hard in the 1970's to preserve this open space as a park and buffer. Ironically, the Plan that resulted from this community-initiated process flies in the face of the very concerns that prompted it.

Throughout the public process on the draft plan, the consultants seemed determined to find that private development at the WMATA site was key to the area's revitalization. The fact that other development projects (several with high density housing) already are proceeding or already have occurred within the planning area did not deter the authors. No amount of evidence could dissuade them from this predetermined outcome.

Nor was the planning process designed to get the information needed to allow for sensible transit and traffic planning to be done. WMATA, Metrobus, DC DOT, Ride-On and other vital experts did not participate in the planning process or answer the public's many questions, despite many requests by members of the Community Working Group and the general public. WMATA's indifference to community concerns about the fate of this publicly-owned property amounts to another form of taxation without representation.

Although the planning process did yield positive recommendations regarding ways to improve other surrounding properties, most of these improvements could be accomplished under existing zoning. For example, there are numerous brownfield sites within two blocks of the Metro for which the community was unified in supporting residential and retail redevelopment. However, all of the non-controversial aspects of the Plan are, in effect, window dressing for the central objective of its authors--namely, to provide a rationale for selling and developing the Metro site.

The other revitalization recommendations in the Plan are very similar to previous plans that have been written but never acted upon. Like those previous plans they have little money or impetus behind them to see they are carried out. In contrast, the portion of the Plan that recommends selling of a vital public asset for private development will swiftly be acted upon if you approve it. That it what this Plan is really all about, and that is why your rejection of it is so vital.

Transportation and Transit Concerns

From its establishment in the 1880s, Takoma has always had transit at its heart. The community was founded along the B&O railroad tracks with the station as its drawing card. People on both sides of the District line strongly support mass transit and want their transit hub to remain as vital and functional in the 21st century as it was in the 19th and 20th.

Intermodal transit requires adequate space and good pedestrian, bike and automobile access. While the Plan pays lip service to putting transit needs first, a glance at the proposed site design shows that it would actually do the opposite. Current transit needs are ignored and future transit growth is stymied. The Plan calls for shrinking the space currently available at the Metro site for buses, bicycles, pedestrians and parking. It calls for a lot of new housing (up to 95 town houses) with additional spaces for the new owners' cars.

Despite repeated and vocal requests from the Working Group and others, a serious and comprehensive transportation and traffic analysis of the potential impacts of the Plan was never done. It is only now being undertaken, after the Plan is completed! (And unlike the Plan, it will be a true cross-jurisdictional effort with Maryland citizens and officials.)

The Takoma Park, Maryland City Council, and the ANC for the Takoma DC side, have both adopted resolutions urging the Council not to approve the Plan until the results of this transportation study are in, and its findings are incorporated into the Plan. That is the right approach.

Traffic concerns are not abstract or speculative. In 1975, the D.C. Municipal Planning Office reported: "The major existing traffic facilities are now operating near capacity…There is little surplus capacity available to sustain new development… Traffic is the main constraint to any development in Takoma." Draft Report of the Municipal Planning Office, District of Columbia Government, Washington DC (1975): Service Area No. 1, Upper Northwest at 8 and 9. Since then traffic has not improved, it has worsened.

The accessibility of transit services has become even more vital to sustaining a livable community. In Maryland, revitalization plans also hinge upon encouraging the use of alternatives to automobile transportation - Transportation Demand Management - in order to reduce air pollution, and control congestion. If feeder bus access is stymied, Maryland as well as DC loses.

We cannot afford to lose our transit hub to private development. And we do not need to give up our Metro site to enable revitalization to occur. Plenty of space is available for housing and retail elsewhere in the immediate vicinity. Indeed, a significant percentage of it is already slated for redevelopment.

Open Space Concerns

The Plan inaccurately asserts that its "proposed redevelopment concept maintains green space similar in size to existing open space." Takoma Central District Plan, January 2002, at 29. A glance at the 'before and after' proposed layouts shows clearly that this claim is untrue. The plain truth is that you cannot insert up to 95 large dwelling units, with parking, onto such a small site without sacrificing much of the open space.

There can be no doubt that, when the Takoma Metro site design was approved in the 1970's, it was intended to serve both the transit and the open space needs of the community. Parkland and a buffer between the transit uses and neighborhood residents were considered key to community happiness. The Municipal Planning Office reported in its 1975 plan for the Metro site environs:

Originally designed for 400 commuter cars, the capacity of the parking lot has been reduced to 100 spaces to be used as kiss-n-ride facilities during rush hours and as shopper parking in off peak hours…. [Two competing designs for the site were developed.]

The WMATA plan … provides the community with the open space it requested. The major differences of the two plans revolve around the location of these two elements: parking and a public park. The WMATA plan places the open space along Cedar Street, and the parking near the apartment buildings (buffered by another open space) with the drive-in entrance on Eastern Avenue; the bus lanes and bays are situated between the Cedar Street park and the parking. The advantages to this design are several: it preserves the existing trees; it permits kiss-n-ride passengers, including the handicapped, to reach the station entrance without crossing the bus bays…[etc.]. This is not the case with the original parkland recommendation, which places the park along Eastern Avenue…"

1975 Municipal Planning Office Report, supra note 1, at 1-2 (emphasis supplied).

Community need for open space continues to be strong because the area already has high density and a low supply of open space. The 1975 D.C. analysis reported that Takoma D.C. was serviced by only one major recreation facility, which was located at 5th and Van Buren Streets. The city found that "recreation facilities now [in 1975!] seem inadequate in the area…" Id. at 5.

Maryland has identical concerns about the shortage of green open space. As the recently approved Takoma Park Master Plan recognizes, "Environmental resources are important indicators of overall quality of life. Residents and employees in urban areas desire pleasant, cool green surroundings with adequate open space to lessen the impacts of noise, wind, temperature, and glare." Takoma Park Master Plan, Planning Board Draft, supra note 2, at 100. The Takoma Park Master Plan further notes that "[b]ecause the area is mostly developed, there are limited opportunities to provide additional facilities." Id. at 93. "The built-out nature of the area provides few opportunities to significantly increase the number or size of existing park holdings." Id. at 99.

Residents of both Takoma Park, MD and Takoma, DC need more parkland and open space. It is unfortunate that WMATA did not offer the Metro site to the District of Columbia Department of Parks and Recreation or the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission once it had decided it no longer wished to own it. WMATA could transfer land to a public body for a public purpose, such as parkland or storm water management, if it determines that it no longer needs the land, without having to pay the Federal government back for the money it used for land acquisition. Section 5334(g) of the Federal Transit Laws, 49 U.S.C. 5301 et. seq.

Neighborhood residents have approached WMATA over the years and asked for enhancements to the park, but have been rebuffed. "The idea of a 'centerpiece' in the park has merit; however, Metro does not build that kind of community facility." Memo from Metro staff to other Metro staff in response to inquiries from Plan Takoma, Nov. 2, 1984. Today this highly-valued green space remains beautiful but somewhat static. Rather than convert it to impervious surface that will exacerbate the District's well-known problems with storm water runoff, the portion of the Metro site that is not needed for transit uses can and should be retained as open space and transformed into a more vibrant and inviting recreational resource.

Green infrastructure is as crucial to a city's vitality as its mass transit and roadway infrastructure. The WMATA site provides both, and neither one is dispensable.

Recommendation

We strongly urge the Council to disapprove the Plan, unless those portions of it that recommend the sale and development of the WMATA-owned Takoma Metro site are stricken from it. We would be pleased to continue to work with the Office of Planning to address the community concerns discussed in this testimony, in order to ensure that transit, traffic and open space needs are incorporated into a Central District Plan that is truly reflective of the unique qualities and community needs of Takoma DC and Takoma Park, MD.

Supplemental Testimony of Historic Takoma, Inc.
Testimony for the Record to the Council of the District of Columbia:
The Takoma Central District Plan
May 21, 2002
Presented by Mark Freedman
Board of Directors, Historic Takoma, Inc.

Historic Takoma would like to take the opportunity to supplement its testimony to address some of the issues raised during the hearing held by Chair Cropp on May 14, 2002.

Our Position

The majority of testimony at the hearing on May 14, and -- based on the nearly 900 signatures on the petition, most likely the majority of the community -- is opposed to 95 townhouses on the WMATA-owned Metro Station site. Many people who testified in favor of the plan explicitly stated that fewer townhouses would be better, but that they did not want to risk an even larger development result. WMATA and the developer, EYA, explicitly stated in response to Chair Cropp's questions that the 95 townhomes is a result of WMATA's price. Additionally, there are great concerns about the loss of the functioning pick up and drop off passenger areas.

Given that this is land purchased with tax dollars for transit and public use, we urge the District Council to make it absolutely clear to WMATA that their price should be driven by DC and community planning, not the other way around. The plan, at least the Metro site portion, should be sent back to planning for revision to better reflect the community's desire for less housing development, better transit facilities and more green space at this location.

Drop Off, Pick Up and Taxis.

Much of the testimony at the May 14 hearing focused on the question of housing vs. green space and bus needs. Another vital use of this site is for drop off and pick up of passengers who live in the adjoining neighborhood and nearby areas. Currently a large lot off of Eastern Avenue serves this need . It includes ample space for waiting for commuters, for easy car flow in and out, and for direct disability access.

The Plan moves this entire function onto a small strip on Carroll Ave adjacent to the Metro and railroad Tracks. We believe that this alignment would fail in two ways. First, as designed, it fails to provide adequate space for rush hour needs for multiple drop offs in the morning and for cars waiting to pick up people in the evening.

Second, drivers are highly likely to bypass it entirely and drive another few hundred feet to the station entrance. This location is already used by drivers and taxis as an illegal drop off and pick up location, contributing to congestion on Carroll. More planning is needed to address these needs.

The Plan also appears to make no provision for disability access to the elevator, which is a considerable distance from the planned drop off area. Currently the drop off lot is near the elevator entrance.

We note too that the Plan has no provision for a taxi cab stand. Instead, the plan provides for a taxi drop off area even further away from the station than the 'drop off' area. This taxi drop off suffers from the same failures as the drop off area described above. For perceived passenger safety reasons or convenience, it will either be unused or the cabs will themselves attempt to pick up and drop off passengers closer to the entrance.

Metro Site vs. Other Sites

A number of questions have been raised about the Metro site in contrast to the other development sites in the immediate area -- namely, why Historic Takoma and others support development at these other sites but not the WMATA/EYA proposed development at the Metro site. The primary difference is that the Metro site is a quasi public property that can and should be designed for public and transit use first. The other sites (two of which are being developed by Mr. Katz and Mr. Eichner) are privately owned. As such, Historic Takoma has supported appropriate use of those sites by their private owners .

Additionally those other sites are blighted with vacant lots, used cars and graffiti, whereas the Metro site is a pleasing and well maintained space. The development on those other sites further demonstrates the need to save the Metro site for transit and open space use, while the other privately owned neighboring sites are developed.

Crime

Some reference has been made to crime in the area and the Metro. This year there have been a number of muggings, car jackings, and a few murders in the area within a few blocks of the Takoma metro station. Overwhelmingly, these have not been on the Metro site itself. Rather, they have been on residential and commercial streets. The site itself offers a well maintained, well lit and safe location. While crime is an issue in this area, it is unclear how development on this site, including a covered parking garage, will affect crime. Representatives of the Fourth District Police have, in fact, expressed concerns about the difficulty of maintaining safety in a covered garage.

Thank you for the opportunity to expand on our testimony.