April 27, 2007
A Tale of Two Tunnels
As of yesterday, Metro was placed among the many city agencies with pricey downtown digs currently being considered for more a affordable address. Mayor Fenty approached Metro yesterday with the idea of selling its eight-story headquarters at 600 5th St. in Northwest and relocating to a new, state-of-the-art facility at the Anacostia Metro station. Fenty and city officials say that such a move would provide an economic boon to both the downtown and Southeast areas, the former through commercial development, and the latter through what we like to call the "Reeves Center Redevelopment Model."
Under the deal, the District government would gain the rights to sell the building, which city officials estimate could fetch at least $68 million. The city would then pay for construction of a new building to house Metro's 1,320 downtown employees. To sweeten the deal, the city has offered Metro an extra $40 million to build a pedestrian tunnel between Gallery Place and Metro Center.
A tunnel between these two adjacent stations has been discussed for years, but money for the project has never been budgeted. The tunnel would connect of all five rail lines in one central location, allowing riders to transfer from the Green or Yellow Line to the Orange or Blue Line with a short walk between the stations, rather than a long wait for a Red Line train or an unnecessary loop though L'Enfant station.
Leaving aside our skepticism of Reeves-style redevelopment, the tunnel sounds like a good idea whose time has come. However, we're a little worried its approval could create a bad case of Tunnel Envy. Metro riders have been calling for a similar pedestrian tunnel between Farragut North and Farragut West for nearly as long, and though those stations aren't quite as busy, from a connectivity standpoint, the idea makes just as much sense. In a city that loves to make hay over equal distribution of development benefits, would the outraged Farragut Faithful demand their fair share of subterranean spoils?
Photo by sduffy
|
Both tunnels should be built, in fact both should have been built years ago. Just don't light the tunnel with those dim, creepy red lights on the Gallery Place Red Line platform...
I don't care if it's lit by torches... gallery place to metro center tunnel now! can they start digging today?
Fenty and city officials say that such a move would provide an economic boon to both the downtown and Southeast areas, the former through commercial development, and the latter through what we like to call the "Reeves Center Redevelopment Model."
Oh, oh, can we get a Ben's Icecream and a gogo club in the lobby? That way, after you get stabbed or shot, you can have icecream while you wait for EMS to show up.
Mmmmmm...sucking-chest-wound-alicious.
DCist--Please check your facts (occasionally at least.) The Reeves Center opened in 1986, when 14th & U was a commercial wasteland. Then-Mayor Barry said that if you put several hundred city workers at 14th & U, businesses will open b/c someone will want to make money selling people lunch and happy hour cocktails.
Twenty-one years later, U Street is a commercial hub pumping millions of tax dollars into the city's general fund each month.
Mayor Barry was a disaster on many levels, but the Reeves Center was one of his absolute triumphs. And he was scorned for it at the time.
You guys probably think Busboys & Poets anchored the revitalization.
I wonder whatever happened to that proposed tunnel between the two Farragut stations. And we're still waiting on definitive word on the Tysons tunnel dispute.
"creepy red lights on the Gallery Place Red Line platform"
That's also the Chinatown Station, right? Maybe those lights are meant to be "auspicious" . . . .
I've checked my facts, Bobby D., and they tell me to be very skeptical of claims that the Reeves Center played much of a role in creating the U St. we know and love. Rather, they point to a combination of city development policies, spillover from business development in Dupont and Adams Morgan, and the opening of the U St. Metro station in '91, among other factors.
I'm not saying Reeves played no role at all, but the fact that the rise of U St. happened around the same time Reeves was erected says little. The delis and hot dog carts Reeves employees might have brought to the area had at best a marginal impact on development.
Also, Reeves remains an example of poor urban design with its big blank walls fronting the street, a large garage entrance swallowing up the sidewalk, and buried retail. It doesn't fit in at all with the character and and economic direction of U St. today, which makes me even more skeptical of the overall benefits it's created.
Talk about your faulty syllogism:
1. Barry puts Reeves Center on U Street.
2. People moved to Shaw because they can't afford Dupont or Adams Morgan, ergo
3. Barry revitalized U Street.
I never noticed anybody from the Reeves Center in Coppis or The Saloon or Pollys. They were too busy getting the hell out of the neighborhood before sundown. Of all the factors responsible for the revitalization of U Street (gentrification moving east, opening the U Street Metro, 9:30 and Black Cat opening, the neighborhood being undervalued throughout the 1980s), the Reeves Center is on the bottom of the list. If anything, U Street flourished in spite of Mayoral/Council, DCRA, and ANC neglect.
would bring at least...
could bring as much as...
Also Bobby D., I don't see any facts about "Reeves Center Development" that need to be checked. You may have higher hopes than the writer of this article for the viability of a plan like this for Anacostia, but this article specifically avoids any discussion of U street's development history.
What a great idea. I had heard of the plan to connect the two Farruget stations before, but hadn't heard about the Gallery Place MetroCenter tunnel until now. It would have to be pretty long though, wouldn't it? Like that tunnel in 42nd street station in NY.
Regarding the Reeves Center, sorry Bobby D, gotta back up DCist Colin here. It had a marginal impact on the revitalization of U street at best. Just becuase U Street came back around the same time, you can't assume causality. The Reeves center is horribly designed. There are no stores or restaurants facing the outside to capture peoples interest. Its a huge dead space at the heart of U Street. When the city finally comes to its senses and demolishes that place, some lucky developer is gonna get one PRIME location.
Monkeyerotica--your syllogism is not the one I presented.
I work in the Reeves Center and frequent every one of the establishments you mention. (Coppis is overrated.)
The heart of the matter is that I bet I dont look like what you think Reeves Center employees should look like.
Yes! I hope Metro signs on the dotted line for this plan - it benefits everyone.
The WMATA HQ on 6th street deadens that half-block. There is no ground floor retail and the building looks more like a parking garage than anything else.
A pedestrian tunnel between Gallery Place and Metro Center would be a godsend.
A new HQ in Anacostia will definitely help spur positive development in that area. I don't see local residents complaining about it like they did the proposed soccer stadium.
If Metro would just allow free above-ground transfers between the Farragut stations or Metro Center and Gallery Place/Chinatown, then the multi-million cost of underground tunnels could be avoided altogether. Ask anyone from Houston what a downtown tunnel system does to urban street life. I can tell you: it decimates it. do you really want everyone scurrying around underground? How much would it cost to get Smartrip cards to recognize these transfers - and from bus to rail for that matter?
Then-Mayor Barry said that if you put several hundred city workers at 14th & U, businesses will open b/c someone will want to make money selling people lunch and happy hour cocktails.
Twenty-one years later, U Street is a commercial hub pumping millions of tax dollars into the city's general fund each month.
Alright, I'll bite. What am I supposed to deduce from these statements? That Reeves Center employees' pocket change transformed U Street?
The heart of the matter is that I bet I dont look like what you think Reeves Center employees should look like.
I take it you dont wear a propeller beanie then?
aj: underground tunnels between stations are found in London and Madrid and many other big transit systems.
I'd rather walk a couple hundred feet in a straight tunnel than have stand on several escalators, go through fare gates, wait at crosswalks on the street level, enter fare gates, and stand on more escalators just to get back to the tracks.
To sweeten the deal, the city has offered Metro an extra $40 million to build a pedestrian tunnel between Gallery Place and Metro Center.
$40 million dollars for a few blocks' distance? wtf?!
CD: duly noted, however it wouldn't hurt to have it as an option or at least a stopgap measure while the tunnels are being created - that won't happen overnight.
nosestuckinabook: excavation is expensive. That's a bargain, look at what Boston shelled out for the Big Dig.
Monkey, your propellor beanie reference was just... priceless.
Sometimes, you're funny. :-)
I'm not sure the sums add up here. The city thinks it can get $68 million for the WMATA building on 6th, but also calculates that it would cost $40million to build the tunnel...
It seems that either the tunnel is overpriced or the WMATA building undervalued. I know nothing about construction costs etc, but it seems that a huge building taking up most of a block in a highly sought-after location would be worth more than one-and-a-half (approx.) tunnels from GP - to Metro Ctr?
Also, the Reeves building did not contribute much to the revitalization of the U Street area, but since the area has transformed itself, I actually kind of like the "Barry Building." The pink concrete and green glass are suitably tasteless to avoid FBI building levels of brutalism. And since it would likely be replaced by a cookie-cutter condo, I hope it stays. I think in ten years when most of 14th is filled in and built up, the Reeves will be a refreshing change from the identical condos.
It takes a LOT of office workers to have much of an impact on a neighborhood:
urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2007/02/retail-numbers-they-dont-want-you-to.html
urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2006/08/misunderstood-learning-about-urban.html
It takes a LOT of office workers to have much of an impact on a neighborhood:
urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2007/02/retail-numbers-they-dont-want-you-to.html
urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2006/08/misunderstood-learning-about-urban.html
Re HibsCasual:
As much as I dislike the uniformity of many of U Street's condos, I think that the Reeves center one day being regarded as a "refreshing change" is about as likely as Marrion Barry passing clean urine.
I would love the benefit of having a pedestrian tunnel, but agree that if they just found a way to not double charge people for walking between stations, it would not be unreasonable to expect people to do it and save the $40M. And really, it's only non-rush hour situations where this is critical anyway, unless you're concerned about sheer congestion on the red line, because with 2-3 minute waits it would still be faster to ride than walk.
And it's condos and apartments that have allowed U street to build up the way it has, not a single office building with marginal impact. It takes a population base in a neighborhood to sustain economic development, and without the added density, the U street "corridor" would be much smaller than it is.