loading...

Proposals for Shaw’s Parcel 42: The Results

by Shilpi Paul

Proposals for Shaw's Parcel 42: The Results: Figure 1
Parcel 42. Google Maps.

Last Thursday, UrbanTurf outlined the six proposals competing for the redevelopment of Parcel 42, a plot of land in Shaw at the intersection of 7th Street and Rhode Island Avenue NW (map). The city wants to see a mixed-use, community-friendly project at the address, which is vacant but very close to several exciting development projects: Progression Place is around the corner, and the revamped Howard Theater and burgeoning restaurant district surrounding it is just a few blocks away.

We polled readers on their favorites and got a huge response, with over 1,676 total votes being cast.

So, what do readers want?

Proposals for Shaw's Parcel 42: The Results: Figure 2
Click to enlarge.

The winning proposal was United House of Prayer’s 50-unit apartment building with a community garden. However, late Friday, we received word that the United House of Prayer had solicited votes for the poll via a mass email to their wider congregation, which stretches as far as California (we got a call from someone on the West Coast wondering why she was being asked to vote on this topic). While the plan may have won the poll without this solicitation, we wanted to share what we learned. Of course, informal polls of this nature are always unscientific, and we will never know whose social networks were tapped to solicit votes.

Proposals for Shaw's Parcel 42: The Results: Figure 3
Rendering of the United House of Prayer proposal.

Coming in a respectable second place was the plan from Neighborhood Development Corporation (NDC), which proposed 81 or 90 units and a Yes! Organic market. NDC’s signed commitment from Yes! may have been appealing to neighbors.

The third most popular option was the plan with the largest amount of public space: the Four Points/Warrenton Group’s proposal, which calls for 96 residential units ranging from townhouses to lofts, and a large public staircase and courtyard.

The fourth most voted for option was the 100-unit residential building with ground-floor retail and several liv-work spaces from POUNDS Properties and Jubilee Housing. 40 percent of the units in this project would be affordable.

The city will be choosing their own favorite in the coming months; we’ll keep you updated as the project progresses.

See other articles related to: shaw, parcel 42

This article originally published at http://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/proposals_for_shaws_parcel_42_the_winner_is/6315

13 Comments

  1. AP said at 6:22 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    What a joke. The UHOP proposal should have been disqualified. I thought this was supposed to be a fun community-based poll by local residents and neighbors. Way to kill the spirit of the poll by mass emailing it out to people as far away as California! Almost every blog I've read has the UHOP proposal as being towards the bottom of the list. I think the second place proposal from NDC should be the real winner here. It also seems to be the most popular on the other blogs as well. I guess we'll see how much support UHOP has at the community meetings...
  1. Payton said at 6:46 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    Thanks for clarifying how the voting went! Half as many apartment units, and with even more parking, does little to help a city that has a severe shortage of housing for people ("for all people," I might add, not "for all cars"). FWIW, checked into the hotel developers and they mostly run limited-service hotels along the East Coast. Holiday Inn Express, Hampton Inn, TownePlace Suites, etc.
  1. Mike said at 7:01 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    UHOP should be ashamed of themselves. As a Shaw resident, I will do everything in my power to make sure that they have no chance at P42. This signals that they care nothing about the honest desires of the community. The hotel idea seems to be the most beneficial, economically.
  1. jacksom said at 7:08 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    Really??? This proposal is by far the least interesting design. As mentioned above, this proposal has only 50 units when the other proposals almost double that amount. With the shortage of housing (especially affordable) in DC and the proximity of this location to 3 metro stations, this site should be built to maximum density. I second that UHOP should be disqualified. Soliciting votes from people who could give a rat’s ass about what’s going on in DC is not fair to those who do care.
  1. jacksom said at 7:28 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    And I want to add, the amount of parking should be minimized. As I mentioned above, 3 metro stations are with walking distance. Fifty units and sixty parking spaces is ridiculous.
  1. Mark Wellborn said at 7:44 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    jackson, There is a typo in the chart. There are 18 parking spaces associated with the UHOP project, not 50. Mark Wellborn Editor
  1. FrankNYC said at 11:39 pm on Monday November 19, 2012:
    I'm not living in the DC-area, but visit often, and I knew a good thing when I saw it. I voted for the second design because it made the most sense and fit the vibe of the area as well. Not sure what the rest of the country was seeing, but as a designer, I can tell you, the average person always gets turned-on by "the modern look" and that's about it.
  1. mla said at 12:17 am on Tuesday November 20, 2012:
    NDC's second option was by far the best option of all presented. Why not show some of the other designs since you admit UHOP may not have been playing fairly?
  1. Mark Wellborn said at 12:22 am on Tuesday November 20, 2012:
    mla, The article from last Thursday where all the proposals and renderings are covered is linked in the first line of the story. Here it is again for your convenience: http://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/six_proposals_for_shaws_parcel_42_revealed/6299 Mark Wellborn Editor
  1. Q-Street said at 12:25 am on Tuesday November 20, 2012:
    I do not trust UHOP or Reitig to ultimately construct a building that looks anything like the renderings they show to the community. The building next to Parcel 42 was presented with a similar rendering a while ago, and they ended up building a gray/maroon/yellow prefab-panel mess that looks like a college dormitory mistake from the 70's. @Jackson. Your implying some increased access to public transit over and above access to the shaw station, when there really is none. All three stations within walking distance are on the same line. No one is going to walk 8 blocks to U street metro, or 6 to the Mt. Vernon metro, just to be on the same line 1 stop away from the metro that they live directly above. Also parking is an issue for the residential streets in that area. There is a strong push from the community to have enough parking in any new structure to completely contain the influx of new residents' vehicles. The tidy idea that people in DC will abandon their cars entirely in favor of rapid transit hasn't quite played out; I don't think it's going to miraculously begin with parcel 42.
  1. Payton said at 3:13 pm on Tuesday November 20, 2012:
    Actually, Q-Street, the number of registered vehicles in the city continues to decline even as the population increases. As the community gains even more services, it will become even more convenient to walk and even fewer people will want to own cars.
  1. Q-Street said at 1:48 am on Wednesday November 21, 2012:
    Actually Payton, that's not true. Per a study by the national capitol region transportation planning board, the number of registered vehicles in DC has increased 3% and is up 4% in the DC metro area from 2008-2011. I'm a public transit fanatic, but you have to be completely blind to the chronic overestimation of public transit's impact on car ownership. It's swell that new urbanists like to talk about idealistic outcomes in a walkable and transit oriented community, but some of us have to find a parking spot in the real world. Parcel 42 is at a three way intersection of an arterial, a commercial corridor and a one-way street with no shoulder parking. There aren't places for residents to park. Minimizing parking in that development will only accomplish creating headaches for the surrounding residential blocks who have limited parking as it is.
  1. CMB said at 7:12 am on Wednesday November 21, 2012:
    Here's the e-mail and I live in the South: Peace all, We need your help!! Last night the UHOP made a presentation to the community at Watha T. Daniel Library and there are 6 developers who are trying to be rewarded the property to build. Please click on the link below and vote for the UHOP to be awarded the property. Scroll down and find the UHOP rendering and vote. Please pass this on to everyone you know who will vote for the UHOP in this regard. We need your help! It will only take a minute. Thanks and pass it on. They're a bunch of scheming greedy individuals

DC Real Estate Guides

Short guides to navigating the DC-area real estate market

We've collected all our helpful guides for buying, selling and renting in and around Washington, DC in one place. Visit guides.urbanturf.com or start browsing below!