An RFP isn't a plan: redux

I caution against cities releasing RFPs--requests for proposals--without being built upon a planning process.  Without a plan, anything can come over the maw and what comes reflects the developer's preferences, not necessarily either "the city" or "the public".  And proposals tend to be conservative because cities are conservative.

A great example of this is the redevelopment of the Walter Reed Military Hospital Campus in DC.  Hey, they've done a good job.  But it's mostly housing and retail, because the city economic development group is most comfortable with that ("Nice looking five story brick apartment building, Parks at Walter Reed development, Washington, DC," 2026).

Some of the RFPs included wacky hope of getting MIT involved, etc., because the campus included the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, which basically was a set of buildings turnkey that could have been used to start a medical school, biotechnology campus, etc.

That happened sort of, but not by the city's hands.  The Children's Hospital of DC separately lobbied Congress to get control of that property and they did.  Stuff's happening there, not sure about how breakthrough it is.

I wasn't involved at all in the public process around Walter Reed even though it's less than two miles from our DC house, because I had been working on a bunch of other stuff.  

Later, some people came to me with their concept of using the new hospital building (since torn down and it cost more than $125 million to do so) and the Pathology facilities to create a graduate medical education program (the aim was to get the Royal College of Surgeons Dublin to open a medical school, and with Washington Adventist University--there is a medical school at Loma Linda University and many Adventist colleges have medical professions education, and other institutions, open other allied medical education programs) and a biotechnology research initiative/research park.  And I wrote it up.

We were far too late in the process, again the city is conservative, and it didn't help that the leaders of the effort were somewhat wacky, one's focus was to use the H1B Visa program for funding, and we couldn't get either the Royal College or Washington Adventist to sign on the dotted line so that the city would take it seriously.

But in contrast to the housing and retail, it could have supported thousands of high paying jobs, including technology associate positions that didn't require postgraduate work.

St. Elizabeths East campus (West is for the federal government).

Later I wrote it up as a proposal for the city's St. Elizabeths campus in SE DC.

-- "POrdinary versus Extraordinary Planning around the rebuilding of the United Medical Center in Southeast Washington DC:  Part Two: Creating a graduate health and biotechnology research initiative on the St. Elizabeths campus," (2018)

And after that went nowhere, suggested the University of Maryland could do it at the new Largo Hospital--UMD's biomedical research is mostly in Baltimore.

-- "University of Maryland could seed a complementary biotechnology and medical education initiative in Prince George's County" (2021)

I learned the importance of pre-planning from the example of Kennedy School in Portland.  Residents wanted a say in how it would be sold and remade.  They ended up supporting the idea of a bed and breakfast ("Vision and Versatility: The Story of McMenamins," Spirited Magazine, "Preservation Brotherhood," Chicago Tribune, 2004, "Preserved in Alcohol: Case Studies of Adaptive Reuse Projects by McMenamins, Inc.," thesis). And the McMenamins Company came up with an amazing response resulting in an award winning property.

Edgefield Manor

But they moved from brewpubs and cinemas to larger property redevelopment earlier, buying the 300 acre Multnomah County poor farm,  Edgefield Manor..

By the time they got the property it was pretty much wrecked.  They found the money to rehabilitate it.  Now it has a hotel, golf course, brewpubs, distillery, gardens, and other amenities.

They've gone on to do this with many properties in Oregon and Washington, they didn't stop with Kennedy School.

Sadly, it's rare to find a developer that is (1) super creative, (2) committed to historic preservation, and (3) willing to work with "white elephant" properties that are difficult and costly to redevelop.  (Note that while the firm doesn't deal that much with former public buildings, Jemal Development is fine with historic buildings, first in DC, then in places like Frederick, Maryland, Richmond, Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo, among others.)

Northampton State Hospital in 2007.

Other cities have either been good or bad at this dimension.  This article laments that such a path and a company like McMenamins isn't active in Massachusetts, ("Miracle Manor," Valley Advocate), suggesting that the old Northampton State Hospital could have been developed similarly.

-- "A planning process done right | NYC to build affordable housing on a city parking lot & points about DC and Montgomery County" (2026)
-- "Adaptive reuse of a high school to a concert space in Portland, Oregion: Revolution Hall" (2023)
-- "One way to encourage community input into development planning" (2010)

TGM photo by Sammy Kogan.

Toronto Waterfront.  Conclusions in the Toronto Globe & Mail article "A bigger Biidaasige Park is another waterfront triumph for Toronto," encapsulates this argument, also mentioning the failure of the Province of Ontario in its quest to "revive" Toronto's waterfront separate from the City.

There is a lesson for other governments about how to make a place. Think hard up front, with public input, about what your goals are; then hire excellent designers, give them direction, and rigorously defend their vision.

... Mr. Glaisek says success began with decades of public advocacy – the citizen group Bring Back the Don was central – and basics: “We had strong leadership, we had funding, and we had the continuity of an organization that could focus attention for 20 solid years.”

While city staff and others helped realize the project, Waterfront has been at the helm. In meeting after meeting, year in and year out, their staff has defended the idea of “leading with landscape” and the specifics of this huge, complex, fragile project.

Of course, that presumes the local government doesn't blow off the opportunity.  In DC, like with Walter Reed, St. Elizabeths, and many other civic building projects. Which the writer points out is a problem with Toronto's city agencies.

Over at Toronto City Hall, none of those conditions exist. The parks department’s output is chaotic and nobody seems to know how its decisions are being made or by whom, much less what the guiding principles and design standards might be.

Waterfront has been different. The expanded Biidaasige invites thoughts of a city that can build great things, and whose greatest times are still ahead of it.

A planning process done right | NYC to build affordable housing on a city parking lot & points about DC and Montgomery County

 A lot of advocates argue that the primary use for ersatz city property that is being sold off should be for affordable housing.  In most places, that doesn't happen.  Land is expensive.  Cities want a lot of money for the property.  The higher the price, the fewer number of affordable units.  And cities don't always do a good job of ensuring the public element of such projects stays good.

For example, NYC is building a lot of housing on what were single story libraries.  The projects that have been built all come with great libraries on the ground floor ("New library/community space + 100% affordable housing mixed use building in New York City").

West End Library, DC.  By contrast, when DC sold off the West End Library site it got a new library and an adjoining cafe, but the library profile is seriously constrained and IMO wasn't designed well or its use of space is encumbered by the housing around it ("West End Deals," and a section within "National Libraries Week and a libraries update").

A Request for Proposals is not a plan.  When cities aim to sell off properties, they often release an RFP, a request for proposals.  Usually the RFP doesn't have good guidance on what the city/citizens believe would be the best use for the property.  Sure, sometimes public engagement processes don't generate good recommendations.  But the city is at the mercy of whether or not "good developers" participate and submit "good proposals" that include public benefits.

Many of the RFPs for such properties in DC have left me dissatisfied, although some still turn out "well" despite the opportunity costs, like the Walter Reed Hospital site ("Nice looking five story brick apartment building, Parks at Walter Reed development, Washington, DC").  Most languish for years.

Kennedy School, Portland.  But examples like the re-creation of Kennedy School in Portland into a bed and breakfast, brewpub, and event space came about because of a solid pre-RFP planning process ("One way to encourage community input into development planning").  

As I say, "an RFP isn't a plan, a plan is a plan."  

I think about this a lot, when most city property sell offs end up with not very creative results. Or institutional property sales, like the various shuttered Catholic facilities in the Brookland neighborhood of DC.

Portland wanted and got a creative result ("Vision and Versatility: The Story of McMenamins," Spirited Magazine, "Preservation Brotherhood," Chicago Tribune, 2004).  

There's a bar, hotel rooms, an outdoor spa, the gym is a cinema and entertainment space, and the facilities are heavily used by nearby residents separately from tourists.

The McMenamin Group that got the property went on to use the same model on difficult to rehabilitate properties throughout the Pacific Northwest, maximizing the civic benefit far beyond Portland.

NYC parking lot conversion.  New York City is doing that with a parking lot for a police precinct.  

It's a small lot, about 0.25 acres, 11,540 s.f.  The community wanted affordable housing there, and a public engagement process outlined what they wanted (324 E. 5th Street: Community Visioning Report, NYC).

The new building will be modern in design but respectful of the historic architecture style and building materials that predominate the neighborhood.

They're jamming a lot into it, 130 units in a tall building.  From the Crain's New York Business article, "City to turn East Village NYPD parking lot into affordable housing":

The development will include community space, a senior adult daycare with multigenerational programming, landscaped terraces, green roofs, an all-electric building system and replacement parking. Housing Works will provide on-site supportive services for residents. Additionally, 30% of the Aurea’s roughly 130 units will be reserved for formerly homeless New Yorkers.

That's an excellent outcome.  And it's because the city isn't charging at all for the land, in return for the public benefit of affordable housing.

Chevy Chase DC.  To be fair to DC, maybe they are learning.  After a lot of controversy and push back by residents ("Opposition to affordable housing in Chevy Chase, DC"), a similar project in the Upper NW neighborhood of Chevy Chase will come with 177 units of housing, with about 1/3 deeply affordable, with a brand new library and community center on the ground floor, retail, public spaces, and underground parking (City press release, Library press release).

Chevy Chase Maryland.  Interestingly, Montgomery County has a similar opportunity in their side of the neighborhood with a similar property.  The County Council wants a mixed use project with a new library and a school, the term limited County Executive doesn't.  It will be interesting to see what happens after this November's election.  

That County Executive ran for Council at large and was (re)elected--he was on Council before getting elected to County Executive.  

He will be somewhat of a wrench in plans to do affordable housing.  He thinks the County is doing fine, despite falling further behind in comparison to suburban counties in Northern Virginia--the county doesn't have the same level of business formation or large businesses, and isn't attracting as many new residents ("The East-West Divide | DC area regional economic development: anchors and where they are placed matter + airports | But military spending matters the most," "East County, Montgomery County, Maryland: Council redistricting spurs ideas for revitalization").

The coming of the Purple Line is the cover story for the June 2026 issue of Mass Transit Magazine ("The MDOT MTA Purple Line: Nearly Two Decades in the Making").  Although they have the timeline way wrong.  I sent them a letter but got no response.

Montgomery County has renewed opportunity because of the Purple Line.  Interestingly, with the addition of the Purple Line light rail, an east-west line from Bethesda to New Carrollton, Montgomery County has some great opportunities to reposition.  

-- "Setting the stage for the Purple Line light rail line to be an overwhelming success: Part 1 | simultaneously introduce improvements to other elements of the transit network" (2017)
-- "Part 2 |   the program (macro changes)"
-- "Part 3 |   influences"
-- "Part 6 |  Creating a transportation development authority in Montgomery and Prince George's County to effectuate placemaking, retail development, and housing programs in association with the Purple Line"
-- "Part 7 | Using the Purple Line to rebrand Montgomery and Prince George's Counties as Design Forward"
-- "Revisiting the Purple Line (series) and a more complete program of complementary improvements to the transit network" (2019)

I didn't get good photos, but I did see the Purple Line under construction on University Boulevard and New Hampshire Avenue on my recent trip to DC, and I was amazed.  It's really happening.

According to the Mass Transit article, it should open in December 2027, "only" 5 years late.  For a time there was talk it would be 2028.  I guess they are pushing hard.

Wikipedia photo of PL construction at the University of Maryland.

Silver Spring.  I wrote a whole series on Silver Spring, inspired by a query from blog reader Ed Drozd.   I never suggested it, but similar programs could be devised for Bethesda, Rockville, and Wheaton.

-- PL #5: Creating a Silver Spring "Sustainable Mobility District" (2017)
- Part 1: Setting the stage
- Part 2: Program items 1- 9
- Part 3: Program items 10-18
- Part 4: Conclusion
- Map for the Silver Spring Sustainable Mobility District
- (Big Hairy) Projects Action Plan(s) as an element of Comprehensive/Master Plans
- Creating the Silver Spring/Montgomery County Arena and Recreation Center
-- "Making "Downtown Silver Spring" a true open air shopping district by adding department stores" (2018)

I did make a related point about Long Branch.

-- "Long Branch, Montgomery County: Main Street manager job | Purple Line" (2026)

Five more items I'd add to a Montgomery County "transportation" agenda, which would have great ROI for economic development more generally, would be:

1. extending the West leg of the Red Line from Shady Grove at least three stations to Gaithersburg and Germantown
2. making the MARC Brunswick rail line bi-directional during the day -- this is in the supplemental piece from 2019
3. including an infill station in North Bethesda
4. a Separated Yellow Line Metrorail either up Georgia Avenue or out New Hampshire Avenue from Fort Totten Metrorail Station could serve more parts of Montgomery County, even towards the border with Howard County
5. push for beginning planning to extend the Purple Line from Bethesda to Tysons.

Location, location, location ... and what zoning allows determine what a property is actually worth

According to Crain's New York Business, this 85-year-old White Castle at 89-03 57th Avenue in Queens is selling for $15 million.

Having dealt with land use issues from the perspective of a revitalization advocate for about 35 years, I have come to belief that most less involved citizens think land use and planning decision making is a game.

That don't see it as a legal process with parameters.  Yes, a lot of the law preferences development if the project meets categories of approved use, height, and mass. Usually this means that those projects are called "matter of right" with no opportunities for citizens to weigh in.

Public notice for a zoning hearing in Detroit.  Flickr photo by Steven Vance.

If not, and a zoning changes of one or more elements are required to develop the property the way the owner wants, it triggers hearings and opportunities for citizens to weigh in on the matter, positively or negatively.

Similarly, with historic preservation if a building is landmarked individually or is part of a historic district, desired changes require approval, which unless minor also trigger a hearing process. 

Some cities extend this to demolitions, an automatic triggering of public review.

The same is true of environmental review when development proposals are located in sensitive areas, etc.

I call these "remedies," opportunities within the law to have input on the process.

Most citizens see approvals as a process that favors developers.  While the process does favor development--after all, cities make the bulk of their revenue from property tax, and commercial property tax is higher than on residential, plus cities have so much untaxed land between government and nonprofits like churches [see the Growth Machine argument]--it's not a slam dunk.

Based on the regulatory framework projects can be defeated.   Developers call when the zoning and review, and permitting process provides the go ahead to build, "entitlements."

The reason this property interests me is that it is seemingly similar to a property matter I dealt with in Salt Lake involving Sugar House Park ("Learnings from a recent zoning issue I've been involved in").  

There a single private property on the perimeter of the park exists as a historical anomaly predating founding of the park.  

Though zoned low density and neighborhood serving, the property owner valued it as if it could be rezoned to a high density use that wasn't neighborhood serving.  They refused to accept anything opposite their belief.  The failure to get approval for an upzone was based on the land use context and the clear language and history of master planning for that neighborhood-this site was never intended to be able to be densely developed.

One of my arguments against the upzone was that the property owner's intransigence shouldn't be rewarded with an upward revaluation of the property.  Ultimately it wasn't.

The Queens site is zoned for medium density residential (say 6-7 stories), and it wouldn't be a stretch given NYC's recent move to build more housing ("City of Yes") that they could get a slight upzone, but not a major one.

Different property.  Different "entitlements".  Different outcomes.  Different value.

In a weak housing market, will Cleveland's Housing Innovation District move the needle?

Cleveland's biggest problem is that the city is shrinking.  The population in 1990 was 505,000 and 372,000 in 2020. 

Now that's a store.

For example the famed Heinin supermarkets local chain announced they're closing their landmark downtown store, located in a historic bank--after downsizing and rebuilding after George Floyd riots closed the store ("Heinen’s closure in downtown Cleveland raises questions about sustaining development").

 And so is the metropolitan area.  The 2020 population was about 2.1 million.  The estimate for 2026 is 1.72 million.  

1836 E. 79th Street, Cleveland, Ohio.

In that context, there's a lot of vacant buildings and lots ("Finding the Potential in Vacant Lots," New York Times) not just in the city proper, but in the suburbs too.  

I know that years ago, Cleveland's inner ring suburbs were leaders in trying to do suburban revitalization (The Northeast Ohio First Suburbs Consortium), but not quite how Arlington County, Virginia was able to because the DC metropolitan area was growing, and they could leverage the addition of Metrorail ("How DC [really Arlington County] densified," Works in Progress).

Still, Cleveland has incredibly social, community and organizational capital. In the 1990s, Cleveland  foundations worked together to force accountability and consolidation on community development corporations.  There are many foundations doing great housing work like the Catholic social justice based Famikos Foundation.  When I was there in 2002, the city had a great facade improvement program and manual.

The Cleveland Restoration Society was a leader in leveraging city monies in bank accounts to fund housing renovation.  They have a revolving fund to invest in property development.  

There are a number of firms specializing in historic preservation financing and rehabilitation of big projects like Sandvik Architects.  And the state has a historic preservation tax credit too.

And they have a program to help churches light their steeples, which I think is really cool.

The Metroparks system is fabulous, with many on the Lake Erie waterfront.  

There are great civic assets like the West Side Market and business improvement districts and community development initiatives all over.  The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.  Terminal Tower is a fabulous train station.  (But all the old department store buildings, massive 1 million s.f. or more are all defunct.)

I always tout there "Business Revitalization Overlay District" as a way to coordinate investment with the public and private sectors.  They have strong design review requirements.  And the State has a strong receivership statute that allows nonprofits to take over properties, cure the title, fix them, and sell them, to bring houses back into use.

They are an example of a line I have, that cities like Cleveland 

"have a desperate willingness to experiment because they have no other choice."

More alternative weeklies need to publish "worst of" articles. Page 1, Page 2.

They still have legacy heavy rail service although it's not well used.  A great system for evaluating bus stops for amenities.  The transit system provides decent coverage, and it was the first one to connect heavy rail service to the local airport in the late 1970s.  A big Midwestern bank is still based there, and there are some other corporations.  In nearby Akron, LeBron James has invested a lot, so has the Knight Foundation.  

The Cleveland Scene alternative weekly still publishes once a month print issues, although the Cleveland Plain Dealer only prints a couple of editions each week. But their urban design writer who was great, Steven Litt, has retired.

Both the Akron and Cleveland areas have great regional bikeway plans and systems.  Plus the universities and the Cleveland Clinic constantly grow.  There are investments in public spaces, the (in my opinion) over touted Health Line BRT, etc.

Creating Cleveland heavy rail is a fascinating story.  The Van Sweringen brothers were developing Shaker Square and Cleveland Heights and they wanted transit service.  To get it, they bought the Nickel Plate Railroad system, to get the necessary right of way.  They also built Terminal Tower.  But they were ruined by the Depression.

Forest City, a regional hardware store chain, was based in Cleveland, and is long since shut down, but the firm shifted to large scale revitalization oriented real estate development in many cities, including DC.  Value City, a regional department store chain specializing in low income markets, was based their too.  It's last iteration in furniture, finally closed this year.  But the founding family, the Schottensteins, when on to be big in vulture investing.

And Playhouse Square is a national best practice example of historic preservation and arts focused development.  They've since created a CDC to build and hold property around the theaters.  

The Gordon Square Arts District is a best practice neighborhood focused arts district revitalization initiative ("A Cleveland Arts District Hustles and Rebounds," NYT).  A number of new developments complement the Capitol Theatre and two buildings converted into smaller community theaters.  Reasonably well designed new buildings too.

To me, Cleveland has a lot going on, and if I could have found gainful employment there, I would have liked to live in the city, despite its cold winters.

I think the Housing Innovation District is interesting, it aligns a wide variety of programs and systems so that both small and larger developers can participate and work with small parcels, not just big ones.  From "'Amazing neighborhoods' that deserve investment. Cleveland proposes East Side improvement district" (Ideastream/NPR)

Cleveland is proposing sweeping development efforts in the historically redlined East Side neighborhoods of Hough, Central and St. Clair-Superior.

Using a suite of economic development tools, including waived permit fees for new construction, modernized zoning codes and a new tax increment financing district, the city plans to put millions toward spurring new housing, businesses and walkable communities in neighborhoods that have been challenged by decades of disinvestment. Cleveland officials are referring to the area as a Housing Innovation District.

"When we think about the Housing Innovation District, it's 'How can we create an area that really incentivizes people to bring new housing,' but [also] really builds wealth block by block in the neighborhood for the existing residents that are here," Tom McNair, the city's Chief of Integrated Development, told reporters in St. Clair-Superior on Wednesday morning. "Because St. Clair Superior, Hough, Central: these are amazing neighborhoods that for far too long haven't gotten the type of investment they deserve."

Lake Erie beach, Cleveland Metroparks.

BUT, at the end of the day, you need households to live in the buildings.  It's not about what the neighborhoods deserve, it's about what the market will support.  

I read a couple of articles on small developers in Chicago and Pittsburgh ("Six new townhomes. Zero buyers. And one developer on the brink," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) who built market rate housing in emerging neighborhoods (so weak not strong) and they couldn't sell them.  Or the houses wouldn't appraise for a mortgage, because of the prevailing housing prices.

I am constantly amazed to see community revitalization programs in specific areas that have spent many hundreds of millions, and it's hard to see improvements, even though they are and usually key civic assets, plus housing--although my line from decades ago, that building better housing for poor people doesn't rebuild broken micro economies all that much, which was my lesson from H Street DC ("Ah, the H Street Community Development Corporation"). 

An awesome house for $325,000 in the Ohio City neighborhood across the river.

OTOH, even marginal additions of population make a difference ("Community revitalization initiatives for smaller communities | marginal attraction of people and commerce even in small amounts makes a difference").

And to be fair, they've really pulled together a lot of policy changes, financing, land etc. to make things happen.  It will be interesting to watch even though I think that it's really tough to move the needle in weak markets.

Real estate investment trusts and transit oriented development: CVS pharmacy moves from a single use site to a mixed use site on New Hampshire Avenue NW, Petworth, Washington, DC

(More from my trip to DC.  And there was so much I didn't have time get to check out--Downtown, Dupont Circle, 14th Street NW, H Street NE, Capitol Hill and Eastern Market, the mixed use Safeway on Kentucky Avenue SE, a bunch of new recreation centers, Georgetown...).  

She tools around in a used electric Fiat 500.  She gave us a tour of Walter Reed.  I think I would have missed a bunch without her chaperoning us.

And I didn't have time to meet up with people outside of our old neighbors--we came out for the high school graduation of the next door girl that "we helped raise" until we moved.

Typically, pharmacy buildings are owned by real estate investment trusts who don't want to complicate a property by making it mixed use ("Problematic outcomes as real estate investment trusts buy more "high street" retail real estate," 2015).  This is counter to good urbanism in cities, but the companies don't care.

That's why when companies like Walmart or Aldi start being okay with locating in mixed use buildings that's a big deal.  Although it's not like they care about the site design or architecture that much.  

There is an Aldi Supermarket on the ground floor of this apartment building on the 800-900 blocks of the south side of H Street NE, Washington, DC.  The Aldi on South Dakota Avenue NE seems like it's more temporary--although that means 20+ years--as the building is under-developed compared to its potential.

If it's a site they want in a leased mixed building setting, they'll take it.  But they'll still build single use buildings, but with underground parking, because land suitable for large parking lots aren't really available in the core of a city ("Lessons from Walmart's foray into DC," 2011, "The reason why Walmart is committed to a store that is part of a mixed use development," 2013). (Also see "LOL: Walmart closing stores, announces it won't move forward with two stores in lower income areas of DC," 2016).

The CVS on Georgia and New Hampshire Avenues in the Petworth neighborhood of DC used to be across the street on a parcel that needed to be heightened but never was. 

I guess they ended their lease and moved to a mixed use building.  There are still other CVS stores in the area that remain single story automobile-focused uses in Takoma DC, on 14th Street NW in Columbia Heights, and on Georgia Avenue NW by the Safeway (still single story although the one in Petworth is not) on Piney Branch Road.  So these remain fallow opportunities for better development.

What this also means for the Petworth site is that the REIT is likely to be willing to sell their single story site now that they can't get an easy tenant for it, allowing for more intense development there, which is a plus for urbanism and the city.

Single story still, while the one in Petworth that was single story has long since been converted into an apartment building with the Safeway on the ground floor.  On the other hand, that site is two short blocks to a subway station.  

Safeway in Petworth has been redeveloped for more than ten years.

This is a nice easy walk to the Takoma Metrorail station, but instead of two short blocks, it's 7/10 mile.  Subway station proximity in DC, which has a transit network contrasted to Baltimore which does not ("WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 5: Making a better transit network | Connecting heavy rail + light rail + railroad "), makes all the difference in properties being worthwhile to develop, or not.  

What the Safeway in Petworth used to be.

A Separated Yellow Line up Georgia Avenue would change the property values overnight, but would require wholesale rezoning like what Arlington County did with Wilson Boulevard, and DC has never gone to that length for land that is already zoned low density residential ("WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2b | Lessons learned: Proposed expansions and the Metrorail system we don't have," 2026).

It does with commercially zoned land, like the liner buildings along Georgia Avenue, plus industrial land and land at transit stations ("To Create Abundant Housing, Ignore the YIMBY Playbook," Washington Monthly).  But to go beyond the liner buildings a block, the way Arlington did, hasn't been done ("How DC Densified," Works in Progress).

It shows that while the development boom in DC has been astounding, there are still plenty of opportunities for redevelopment, but Metrorail proximity is key ("Today WMATA Metrorail's 50th anniversary from the start of service | Part 1: many lessons can be found, if you look," 2026).

This makes DC's failure to leverage streetcar service for the forthcoming redo of the RFK campus into a mixed use development anchored by an NFL football stadium, all the more apparent ("Bye DC Streetcar | Too small to reshape DC policy, Big enough to spur $1 billion in economic development,").  

With the streetcar, DC's H Street NE is the most intensely developed corridor without immediate Metrorail access (although Union Station is nearby).  

Streetcar on H Street NE.

Visual simulation of what a sreetcar could have looked like on Georgia Avenue NW by Tim Hampton, then of VisArts when this was done, c. 2010.  

This is the Park Place Apartment building at the intersection with New Hampshire Avenue NW.

What Georgia Avenue NW could have looked like with a streetcar.  The apartment building is extant at Georgia and New Hampshire Avenues (built by Chris Donatelli, "Chris Donatelli, a DC real estate developer, dead at 58") but the streetcar is not.

It was proof positive that the city needed to put streetcars on Georgia Avenue-7th Street NW/SW connecting to the Wharf, Rhode Island Avenue, Benning Road-Minnesota Avenue, Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue/Southern Avenue SE, and Kennedy Street-Riggs Road to spur development by providing better transit access between Metrorail stations, but as a way to spark development more.

For some reason, DC's elected officials still don't accept that Metrorail is the foundation of DC's economic success since 2000.  Without it, the city would be provincial like, more like a state capital that isn't all that great--like Albany, New York (which loses out because people and many state government agencies prefer New York City).

===

The old streetcar network used to serve the US Capitol via a couple different lines.

I also suggested a heritage streetcar system with visitor centers and an expanded Union Station with transportation museum functions for the National Mall.

-- "Revisiting: a proposal for heritage streetcar service on the National Mall | adding service to the DC waterfront," 2022

Nice looking five story brick apartment building, Parks at Walter Reed development, Washington, DC

The Walter Reed Army Medical Center was a large hospital and research campus on Georgia Avenue NW in Washington, DC.

It was merged and moved into the Bethesda Naval Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland.

The old campus went through a de-accession process and DC bought it and did a plan, calling for housing and retail mostly, with civic uses in some of the historic buildings.

I fell in with some people, too late in the process, who proposed instead of a predominately housing oriented project, a graduate medical education and biotechnology program for the site, with the aim of building back the jobs element of the campus--which when fully staffed had almost 8,000 employees.

The original hospital building is still there, but still hasn't been redeveloped.

But DC isn't particularly innovative when it comes to economic development planning.  They are comfortable with housing and retail, but not much of anything else ("Demolition Marks Turning Point for Decommissioned Hospital Site," Engineering News Record). From the Washington Business Journal article "Historic hospital building at former Walter Reed campus for sale":

The Parks at Walter Reed’s main square, anchored by a Whole Foods, other retail and apartments, is the centerpiece of the larger $700 million development, which is slated to include 2,100 housing units, 100,000 square feet of retail and 200,000 square feet of office at buildout. 

The long-term plan is for most of the historic buildings remaining on the campus to be redeveloped or preserved. But the development team has also marketed a few other properties on the campus, largely aimed at developers with niche ambitions.

Partly because the lead was somewhat of a wack job, even though a credentialed medical doctor with some affiliations with the Royal College of Surgeons Medical School in Dublin was part of the group and we were working with the nearby Washington Adventist University, which like many 7th Day Adventist colleges, has a number of health professional programs (Loma Linda University in California is a bonafide graduate medical school), we just never got anywhere.

Photo: Critical Systems.

Although later, lobbying directly with Congress, Children's Hospital Center took over the old Armed Forces Institute of Pathology there, which would have been turnkey for a medical school, and set it up to do research ("Children's National Health System Accepts Walter Reed Property").  

They're there, but I don't know how its progressing.  They call it the Innovation Campus ("NIH awards $6.7M to build additional lab space at Children’s National Research & Innovation Campus").  But it's a $6 billion project, so it's a big deal.

I ended up rewriting the concept for the St. Elizabeths campus in Southeast DC, where DC ended up building a new hospital.  

But that program ended up being a pretty ordinary hospital, not the public health innovator, graduate health education and biotechnology campus I proposed.  Again, because DC just isn't very innovative.

-- "Ordinary versus Extraordinary Planning around the rebuilding of the United Medical Center in Southeast Washington DC | Part One: Rearticulating the system of health and wellness care East of the River" (2018)
-- "Part Two: Creating a graduate health and biotechnology research initiative on the St. Elizabeths campus," (2018)
-- "Part three: the potential for donations around an expanded program," (2018)

-- "The new Cedar Hill Regional Hospital opens in Southeast DC" (2025)

-- "Revisiting East of the River medical care: United Medical Center" (2018)
-- "Update on DC's plans to build a new United Medical Center" (2018)

I also suggested University of Maryland could have done it at Largo.

-- "University of Maryland could seed a complementary biotechnology and medical education initiative in Prince George's County" (2021)

And I keep revising it...

-- "Hospitals as urban anchors/revitalization levers, not usually, but with great potential to serve communities in important ways: Examples are two forthcoming projects by Intermountain Health and University of Utah Health" (2023)

Although later I realized, when writing about the conversion of the Pfizer research campus in Ann Arbor, Michigan, seeding a biotechnology program is quite hard.  That facility had a lot of drugs in the pipeline which Pfizer was no longer interested in, and they willingly let new startups take them over.

-- "How the closure of a Pfizer research center in Ann Arbor, Michigan led to the development of a more robust and independent biotech sector" (2021)

Although I have to say the development is pretty impressive.  A lot is there, and nice public spaces, a super beautiful Whole Foods supermarket, and other stuff.  Lots of apartments.

Because it was designated as a historic district during the planning process, there is design review for renovation of old buildings as well as new construction.  While most buildings aren't nearly as nice and historically compatible as the one at the top of the entry, they're not terrible.  But nowhere as good as the one pictured above.

The first building is so good because it abuts a historic building.

This building has the Whole Foods on the ground floor.  It looks quite good architecturally for new construction.

The Plaza area

Whole Foods.  Because there are charter schools on the campus, the kids/youth grow up being able to experience this at lunch and after school.  It's open to all, not limited to residents of the development.  So it's a great public park amenity that the city doesn't have to pay to maintain--and couldn't at this high level of design and maintenance.

Big League States: Illinois versus Indiana | Maybe Illinois Wins By Losing

"Big League City: Small Cities" discusses how professional sports teams can help to redefine smaller communities by putting the city into global media systems communicating about particular sports leagues, especially the NBA, which like soccer outside of the US, is a more internationalized brand.

"Big League City: Big League States | The real advantage is held by the sports team" discusses the competition between states when sports teams are located in metropolitan areas spanning two states.  

That entry focused on Kansas vs. Missouri in landing a new facility for the KC Chiefs NFL football team, and the offering of over $1 billion in incentives.  

"Big League City: Big League States: Part 2, Salt Lake/Utah" discusses how success of the Utah Mammoth hockey team having moved from Phoenix, is helping to reposition the Salt Lake City metropolitan area as competitive for professional baseball, even though it is a small market.

Towards the tail end of the Kansas vs. Missouri "win," Indiana threw itself successfully into the competition for a new stadium for the Chicago Bears football team.  The team had been playing off Chicago versus the suburb of Arlington Heights, where it bought an old horse racing track as a site for a new stadium, but they had a hard time getting the kind of tax breaks they wanted from the various taxing districts especially schools.

Indiana saw an opportunity and seized on it, and now according to Sports Illustrated ("Bears Heading to Indiana and It's Obvious Who Is Most to Blame"), after the Illinois Legislature failed to pass the kind of bill that the Bears wanted to facilitate their suburban location for the team are going to Indiana.  From the article:

The city and the state have had three years to take the Bears seriously and only now realize they should have. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson is the chief culprit here. He drove the Bears to Indiana by insisting it had to be Chicago or he wasn't supporting it.

Illinois and Chicago chasing both business and residents away is a very common theme. This is just another example. If not, then why did Indiana have no problem getting their plan in order to add a second NFL team?

Nashville, Buffalo and Cleveland all eventually got stadium situations resolved one way or the other. Illinois' legislators and Chicago chose to take the route Kansas City, Mo. and New York City took. They let business leave.

It's all been going on in Illinois since before the Bears even batted an eyelash at Arlington Heights. And how is that kind of general approach toward business working out, by the way?

Ironically, a stadium in Hammond is easier to reach for many in the Chicago metropolitan area compared to the Arlington Heights location ("'They were running into typical bureaucratic meandering, and here we are' | Bears board votes to move team from Chicago to Indiana," WTHR/NBC).

Given that football team stadiums cost so much money, and have few events, maybe Illinois is the real winner here, especially as the Chicago White Sox continue to seek public monies towards a new development for that team, as well as other sports projects seeking public funds (men's soccer, women's soccer, etc.).

If they are going to allocate scare dollars to stadiums and arenas, do it for the ones that have the most activity.

Although at least for in-city locations, football teams are starting to do a better job planning for more events, although only Miami seems to be doing it successfully, well Las Vegas maybe too but more indirectly because it's a good location for signature concerts.

-- "You get what you plan for: the multi-use Miami Hard Rock Stadium versus typical football stadiums | Washington Commanders"