Community Input Effort launched July 8


On Monday, July 8 and Saturday, July 13, Councilmember Tommy Wells launched a “Community Input Effort” to draw out ideas, suggestions and support for the beautification of the Eastern Market Metro Park & Plaza.


2 thoughts on “Community Input Effort launched July 8

  1. I attended the planning meeting on Saturday and left with the clear understanding that nothing was off the table. I am surprised to read on the home page to this site that re-routing Pennsylvania is ‘off the table.’ With this new information, please take my comment and link for whatever value it provides. I’ve created a website to raise awareness of the possibilities presented by creating a public square.

    I hope to receive feedback.

  2. Pat says:

    I attended the December Info Session at the Hill Center. A key factor of Amy Weinstein’s presentation was that commentors should feel free to “pick and choose” / “mix and match” among the elements of concepts A & B. Yet the web site for comments forces us into Concept A comments and Concept B comments. For myself, that is not how I wish to comment. So here are my comments on the various elements of both Concepts A & B.

    First, I wish to compliment the designers, especially, Lisa Delplace. She has developed thoughtful options for the hardscape of the Eastern Market Metro Plaza spaces.

    Here, in no particular order, are my comments on the “mix and match” options.

    I enthusiastically endorse the option of expanding SE Library UNDERGROUND! This is brilliant! Our neighborhood so badly needs a larger library building and now these clever people have come up with a way in which this can be achieved within the limits of its preserved historic character and in an historic preservation district.

    I know that the many folks who now cut across Penna. Ave. mid-block from the north to reach the Metro entrance will object strongly to elimination of the cut-across. And, in general, I can empathize with why they do this. 1) They don’t have to wait for the street lights to change at 8th & Penna. Ave. and 2) The cut-through probably saves them 1 or more minutes’ wait for the walk light to change. But this cut-across is dangerous. Moreover, I think all of us DC residents need to accept the constraints of “walk” lights. There is so much vehicular traffic in DC that it is dangerous to have mid-block crossing (escaping the street lights)

    I agree with “no active use of the medians”. Pennsylvania Ave. has so much vehicular traffic that it is dangerous to have active use of the medians. Re the medians, I prefer the raised median areas … the fenced bioswales don’t fit well into this place on Capitol Hill.

    Here’s a personal anecdote about the heavy flow of vehicular traffic on Pennsylvania Ave. at and close to the E Mkt Metro Plaza. This anecdote is about bicycles on the sidewalks in the 600 block of Pennsylvania Ave. Bicycles are now allowed on this block’s very busy sidewalks. Yet cyclists travel much faster than the pedestrians AND silently come up behind pedestrians with no forewarning! As a pedestrian, I find these faster-moving cyclists scarey … what if I suddenly decided to move across the sidewalk without looking behind me? I could be struck and hurt by a cyclist! I am now afraid to walk on this block of Penna. Ave. So why do cyclists ride on this busy sidewalk filled with pedestrians? Here’s what a cyclist who attended the initial public meeting on E Mkt Metro Plaza design said / she was a person of about my age .. in our 70s. She said, “In this block of Pennsylvania Ave. there is so much (vehicular) traffic that I find it too dangerous to bike on it, so I bike on the sidewalk.” !!!!!! Our city planners and candidates for public office need to think more carefully about how to fit bicycles into our city with so many pedestrians and motor vehicles.

    I applaud the thoughtful planning of options for moving the bus stops.

    Compliments on the evaluation of existing trees on Parcels 1 and 4 — which will be carefully preserved; which are in compromised condition and should be replaced.

    The “theming” of the play area in Parcel 1 seems totally artificial. perhaps clever for appealing the special audiences (e.g. Anacostia Watershed Society), but meaningless to the children who will play there, I recommend that planners focus on designing a play area that will be interesting for children AND allow active play. Interactive water features are interesting …tho I wonder whether regular visiting children will find them interesting on a continuing basis. It is clear that the children who now come to the guerilla garden like the “moveable” small structures. Rather than “attractive small wood moveable houses” (which will appeal to parents and planners), how about purchasing (and regularly replacing) moveable structures and toys such as those now in the guerrilla garden?

    The idea of a “community garden” with tiny plots should be deep-sixed. For many years I have been able to observe children in vegetable gardens. Except when parents work very closely with them to make the gardening experiences in the family plot interesting for them, they will not be interested. Children have short attention spans & are captured by creating activities where positive reinforcement in immediate — which is the opposite of planting seeds for a vegetable garden where the soonest they might be able to harvest a crop … radishes or leaf lettuce, in one month.

    I like the larger adult play area in Concept B. And think Parcel 4 is too busy for an adult play area.

    I like the bosque on Parcel 4 … in Concept A I think. A place where folks can sit and relax and rest IN THE SHADE (so important during our very hot summers) There are so few places near the Metro station for people to be able to sit and rest.

    The proposal to eliminate the D St. extension on south side of Penna Ave. (Parcel 3) makes good sense.

    The proposal to reverse the direction of traffic on the D St. side of Parcel 4 seems sensible to me. Tho on store owner on that strip said (at the public meeting) that the delivery trucks using that street strongly opposed this reversal. It would be good to learn the reasons for their opposition to this reversal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s