DOCSLIB.ORG

Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont Planned Unit Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont Planned Unit Development 202.942.5000 ARNOLD & PORTER 202.942.5999 Fax 555 Twelfth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004-1206 July 17, 2001 Ms. Carol Mitten, Chair District of Columbia Zoning Commission 441 4th Street, N.W. Suite 210 Washington, D.C. 20001 Re: Pre-Hearing Submission Zoning Commission Case No. Ol-12C Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont Planned Unit Development Dear Ms. Mitten and Members of the Commission: Pursuant to§ 3013 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure before the Zoning Commission, we are herewith submitting twenty (20) copies of the Pre-Hearing Submission on behalf of the applicant in the above-referenced case. This information includes the following items: 1. Twenty (20) copies of the original application booklet, modified in part to reflect more refined plans. 2. A list of witnesses who will testify at the public hearing, a summary of their testimony, and an estimate of the time required for the applicant's presentation. 3. Additional reports and plans, including: • Architectural Plans by Heffner Architects • Revised Site Plan by Ben Dyer and Associates • Traffic Impact Analysis Study by O.R. George & Associates, Inc. 4. Twenty (20) copies ofreduced plans and two (2) sets of full-size plans 5. As to the requirement in§ 3013.3 to name the property owners in the ~ase of a map amendment, no rezoning is proposed in this application. ZONING COMMISSION 6. Certification pursuant to § 3013.7: ZONING COMMISSION District of Columbia Case No. 01-12 ZONING COMMISSION Washington, DC New York Los Angeles Century City Denver London NorthernDistrict Virginia of Columbia CASE NO.01-12 EXHIBITDeletedEXHIBIT NO.16A1 NO.16 Ms. Carol Mitten D.C. Zoning Commission July 17, 2001 Page 2 We hereby certify that all of the requirements of§ 3013 have been complied with in this submission. 7. A list of all property owners within 200 feet of the subject property is on the following page. Sincerely, ARNOLD & PORTER <::...,AC, Cynthia A~ano Y)? A,~1 Nathan W. Gross, AICP Enclosures cc: David McGettigan, Office of Planning PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF SUBJECT PROPERTY Constance B. Thompson 4560 Texas Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20019 Janice Anita Vailes 3320 D Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20019 Sheila M.Carson-Carr 515 46th Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20019 Karen M. Settles 234 3ih Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20019 Rodney L. Newman 3333 Croffut Place, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20019 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 ih Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20024 National Park Service Regional Headquarters 1100 Ohio Drive, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20024 NEHEMIAH HOMES AT FORT DUPONT PRE-HEARING STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ZONING COMMISSION FORA CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. 01-12C Application of: WIN/Enterprise Fort Dupont Nehemiah Homes, Inc. 1226 Vermont Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 By: Arnold & Porter Cynthia A. Giordano Nate Gross July 17, 2001 NEHEMIAH HOMES AT FORT DUPONT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Project Team APPLICANT: WIN/Enterprise Fort Dupont Nehemiah Homes, Inc. PROPERTY OWNER: District of Columbia Housing Authority RESIDENTS ADVISORY GROUP Fort Dupont Dwellings and AND CO-APPLICANT Additions Resident Council PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE Design Collective, Inc. Baltimore, MD LDR International, Inc. Columbia, MD Heffner Architects Alexandria, Virginia CIVIL ENGINEER Ben Dyer and Associates, Inc. Mitchellville, MD GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER Hardin-Kight Associates, Inc. Glen Burnie, MD TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT O.R. George and Associates Silver Spring, MD LAND USE COUNSEL Arnold & Porter Washington, D.C. TABLE OF CONTENTS Compliance with Consolidated PUD Requirements 1-11 List of Witnesses and Time Estimate for Presentation of Case lll Summary of Testimony of Witnesses IV-Vlll CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 A. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 B. PUD SITE ZONING 3 C. THE APPLICANT 4 D. THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD 4 E. TAB ULATION OF DEVELOPMENT DATA 6 CHAPTER II PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS 7 A. PUBLIC BENEFITS AND PROJECT AMENITIES 7 1. Housing and Affordable Housing 2. Urban Design, Architecture, Open Spaces, Site Planning 3. Environmental Benefits 4. Efficient and Safe Vehicular Access B. CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 11 1. Compliance with Major Themes 2. Compliance with Major Plan Elements A. Housing Element B. Land Use Element C. Environmental Protection Element CHAPTER III CONCLUSION 15 EXHIBITS Site Location and Zoning Map Exhibit A Notice oflntent to File a PUD, Certificate of Notice, Application Exhibit B SITE PLANS Exhibit C Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Utilities, Sediment Control Plan, Slope Analysis Plan ARCHITECTURAL PLANS Exhibit D Sections, Elevations, Floor Plans TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Exhibit E COMPLIANCE WITH CONSOLIDATED PUD REQUIREMENTS 1. Area Requirement: The project site of 17.55 acres (20.73 acres including roads) easily complies with the minimum area requirement of two (2) acres for a PUD in the R-5-A District. 2. Notice: The Certificate of Notice herein states that land use counsel, as agents for the Applicant, mailed a Notice oflntent to File a Zoning Application dated April 24, 2001 to owners of property within 200 feet of the project perimeter and to the Advisory Neighborhood Commission (7 A) in which the subject property is located, as required by Section 2405.7 of the Zoning Regulations. 3. Filing Requirements: A. First Stage(§ 2406.11): Requirement Page or Figure Number Completed Application Form 111 Map showing location of project and zoning Exhibit A Statement of Purposes and Objectives How the project meets PUD Evaluation Standards 7- 14 General site, landscape and development plan Plans, C-1, C-2 Tabulation of development data 6 Circulation plan Plans, C-1 Landscaping plan Plans, C-2 Existing topography Plans, C-6 Estimated quantities of water and sewer demand 6 i. B. Second Stage (§ 2406.12): Application form 111 Detailed statement of uses 1-7 Detailed site plan Plans, C-1 Detailed landscaping and grading plan Plans, C-2 Typical floor plans, sections and elevations Attachments Detailed circulation plan Plans, C-1 11. LIST OF WITNESSES AND ESTIMATE OF TIME REQUIRED TO PRESENT CASE Witnesses: Raymond Nix, Executive Director, Enterprise Homes, Inc. Ben Contee and John More, Washington Interfaith Network Kevin Caillowet, Ben Dyer & Associates, Civil Engineer Heffner Architects Nate Gross, Arnold & Porter, City Planner 0 .R. George, 0 .R. George & Associates, Transportation Consultant Estimated Time Required to Present Case:: 1.5 to 2.0 hours IV. Summary of Testimony of Raymond Nix, Executive Director, Enterprise Homes, Inc. Ben Contee, President of the Board, and John More, Executive Director Washington Interfaith Network I. Enterprise Homes, Inc. and Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont Partnership II. Title and Responsibilities III. Project Background IV. PUD Development Planning, Financing Sources and Timetable V. Community Involvement in PUD Planning v. Summary of Testimony of James Heffner or James Bryan Heffner Architects I. Architectural Firm A. Introduction B. Experience with Similar Projects II. Site Location and Description III. Review of Plans for the PUD IV. Building Materials V. Review of Necessary Areas of Flexibility for the Project Vl. Summary of Testimony of Kevin Caillowet, Civil Engineer Ben Dyer and Associates I. Engineering Firm A. Introduction B. Experience with Similar Projects II. Topography of Site and Site Plan III. Bio-Retention Ponds and Open Space/Recreation Features Vll. Summary of Testimony ofNathan W. Gross, AICP, Arnold & Porter I. Identification and Expertise in City Planning II. Assessment of Key Planning Issues and Benefits of Proposed Project III. Consistency of Project with City Planning Goals and PUD Evaluation Standards viii. Summary of Testimony of 0. R. George, Transportation Consultant 0. R. George and Associates I. Identification and Experience with Similar Projects II. Summary of Existing Roadway and Traffic Conditions III. Summary of Analysis of Projected Future Traffic Conditions after Development of Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background and Project Description This document is the Pre-Hearing Submission for Zoning Commission Case No. 01-12C, the Nehemiah Homes at Fort Dupont planned unit development ("PUD"). The proposed development is a mixed-income, affordable residential community on a 20.73- acre site in the Greenway neighborhood of Southeast Washington, in Ward 7 and within the area of Advisory Neighborhood Commission ("ANC") 7 A. The site is bounded generally by Ridge Road and Bums Street on the southwest and northeast and by Band D Streets on the north and south, all S.E. This property consists of vacant land that was formerly improved with 268 walk-up apartments in the Fort Dupont Dwellings and Fort Dupont Additions public housing complex. In the mid- 1990s, DCHA determined that the apartments were not economically feasible to rehabilitate or to maintain as public housing. With the approval of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") and with the assistance of a Hope VI Demolition Grant, the subject buildings were demolished in 1996 (Fort Dupont Dwellings) and 1999 (Fort Dupont Addition). The site is characterized by rolling terrain and scenic views, as well as an existing street system. Slopes are steep in some locations. The land area is 20. 73 acres, including 3.18 acres devoted to existing streets. The Applicant is also creating some new roads to serve the project and is applying to the Office of the Surveyor to dedicate these roads to the city upon completion. The PUD plan is to construct 147 townhouses for sale at affordable prices. Over 50% of the homes are targeted for families earning less than 65% of the D.C. area median 2 income (approximately $45,000 for a family of four in 2000), and 20 dwellings are reserved for families with incomes between $15,000 and $20,000. Fort Dupont Dwellings' former public housing residents will have first preference for purchase of homes, followed by other residents of public housing and first-time homebuyers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ward 7 Heritage Guide
    WARD 7 HERITAGE GUIDE A Discussion of Ward 7 Cultural and Heritage Resources Ward 7 Heritage Guide Text by Patsy M. Fletcher, DC Historic Preservation Office Design by Kim Elliott, DC Historic Preservation Office Published 2013 Unless stated otherwise, photographs and images are from the DC Office of Planning collection. This project has been funded in part by U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service Historic Preservation Fund grant funds, administered by the District of Columbia’s Historic Preservation Office. The contents and opinions contained in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation by the U.S. Department of the Interior. This program has received Federal financial assistance for the identification, protection, and/or rehabilitation of historic properties and cultural resources in the District of Columbia. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or disability in its Federally assisted programs. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Report – District of Columbia a G St 2016 Pdate
    A G ST 2016 PDATE PROGRESS REPOR Our Work to Upgrade Reliability District of Columbia Progress Results 1. TRIMMING TREES Many of Pepco’s outages are a direct result of trees We trimmed trees along 52.13 miles of power lines in falling on power lines. Pepco is aggressively trimming the District of Columbia during August, bringing the trees along public rights of way to obtain increased annual total to 278.2 miles. The annual target for clearance between the overhead electric wires and 2016 is 400 miles. existing trees. Pepco also works with District of Columbia communities and homeowners to remove potentially hazardous trees which fall outside of the company’s right of way area. 2. IMPROVING PRIORITY FEEDERS A feeder is an electric power line that distributes In August, we completed work in the Navy Yard area. power to up to 1,100 customers within a specific We continued work in the areas of Fort Davis, geographic area. Each year, across the District of Capitol Hill, Deanwood, Hillbrook and Fort Dupont. Columbia, Pepco selects feeders for additional work We plan to complete 16 projects during 2016. to improve performance. 3. PREPARING FOR SYSTEM GROWT Similar to upgrading electric service to your home to In August, we completed work in the Metro Center accommodate new appliances and electronic devices, area. We continued work on projects in the areas of Pepco is continuing to upgrade power lines and is eorgetown, Foggy Bottom, Petworth and Brookland. adding circuits to accommodate new customers and We plan to complete six projects during 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Anacostia River Watershed Restoration Plan
    Anacostia River Watershed Restoration Plan Fort Dupont Subwatershed Provisional Restoration Project Inventory - July 2009 Table of Contents I. Background ................................................................................................................. 2 II. Restoration Inventory .................................................................................................. 3 A. Impervious Features Summary ............................................................................ 4 B. Existing Stormwater Management Facilities Summary ...................................... 7 C. Candidate Restoration Project Summary ........................................................... 10 D. Fort Dupont Candidate Restoration Projects ..................................................... 13 1 I. Background The Fort Dupont tributary is a third order tributary to the Anacostia River and is 443 acres (0.69 square miles). Although the tributary lies entirely within the District of Columbia, the National Park Service (NPS) owns about 85-percent of the land (376 acres) drained by Fort Dupont and its three small tributaries. Approximately 80-percent of the NPS-owned land is forested by mature eastern hardwoods. The average impervious level in the watershed is 13.3-percent, located primarily in the watershed’s headwaters. Despite this relatively low level of imperviousness, the impacts of uncontrolled stormwater runoff to the stream channel are clear. Approximately 1.5 miles of the Fort Dupont’s 1.9-mile main stem has unstable, eroding
    [Show full text]
  • Ephemeral Stormwater Outfall Restoration Park Drive RSC Fort Dupont Park (National Park Service), SE Washington DC Dcwater
    Ephemeral Stormwater Outfall Restoration Park Drive RSC Fort Dupont Park (National Park Service), SE Washington DC DCWater Project Goals: • Provide stable conveyance ofofof 100100100- 100 ---yearyear storm event through thethethe design ofofof boulder cascades andandand cobble riffles, thus minimizing sediment loading tototo receiving stream channel, • Minimize impacts tototo well vegetated, steep slopes past thethethe gully’s toptoptop ofofof bank • Maximize nutrient uptake andandand improve water quality tototo thethethe unnamed tributary ofofof thethethe Anacostia River bybyby promoting infiltration, detention, andandand seepage through thethethe sand/mulch fill,fill,fill, which increases denitrification andandand sediment filtering, • Dissipate energy atatat thethethe existing outfall discharge point through thethethe design ofofof aaa series ofofof dissipation poolspools. ... Additional Project Benefits: • Enhance thethethe ecological functions ofofof thethethe sitesitesite through thethethe recharging ofofof groundwater andandand creation ofofof riffle/pools complexes, • Attenuate stormwater peak discharges tototo thethethe downstream, unnamed tributary ofofof thethethe Anacostia River through thethethe conversion ofofof surface flow tototo subsubsub- sub ---surfacesurface flow, • Preserve valuable over story trees bybyby minimizing construction impacts tototo thethethe adjacent woodlands, • Install aaa viable demonstration project tototo showcase costcost- ---effectiveeffective andandand ecologically appropriate restoration techniquestechniques.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Washington, D.C.'S Neighborhoods A-3
    State of Washington, D.C.’s Neighborhoods Prepared by Peter A. Tatian G. Thomas Kingsley Margery Austin Turner Jennifer Comey Randy Rosso Prepared for The Office of Planning The Government of the District of Columbia September 30, 2008 The Urban Institute 2100 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 UI project no. 08040-000-01 State of Washington, D.C.’s Neighborhoods ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments............................................................................................. vi About this Report ............................................................................................... 1 I. Introduction...................................................................................................... 3 II. Demographics................................................................................................. 9 Population......................................................................................................................9 Households..................................................................................................................13 III. Economy – Jobs and Income ..................................................................... 15 Employed Residents and Unemployment Rate...........................................................15 Poverty and Household Income ..................................................................................18 Public Assistance
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Dupont Park Historic Resources Study Final Robinson & Associates
    Fort Dupont Park Historic Resources Study Final Robinson & Associates, Inc. November 1, 2004 Page 1 ______________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 2 II. PURPOSE AND METHODOLOGY 5 III. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE 6 IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT 20 1. Pre-Civil War History 20 2. 1861-65: The Civil War and Construction of Fort Dupont 25 3. Post-Civil War Changes to Washington and its Forts 38 4. The Planning and Construction of the Fort Drive 48 5. Creation of Fort Dupont Park 75 6. 1933-42: The Civilian Conservation Corps Camp at Fort Dupont Park 103 7. 1942-45: Antiaircraft Artillery Command Positioned in Fort Dupont Park 116 8. History of the Golf Course 121 9. 1938 through the 1970s: Continued Development of Fort Dupont Park 131 10. Recreational, Cultural, and African-American Family Use of Fort Dupont Park 145 11. Proposals for the Fort Circle Parks 152 12. Description of Fort Dupont Park Landscape Characteristics, Buildings and Structures 155 V. BIBLIOGRAPHY 178 VI. KEY PARK LEGISLATION 191 Fort Dupont Park Historic Resources Study Final Robinson & Associates, Inc. November 1, 2004 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________________________ I. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 Fort Dupont Park is located in the southeast quadrant of Washington, D.C. 7 Figure 2 Fort Dupont Park urban context, 1995 8 Figure 3 Map of current Fort Dupont Park resources 19 Figure 4 Detail of the 1856-59 Boschke Topographical Map 24 Figure 5 Detail
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Dupont Subwatershed Restoration: 1999 Baseline Stream Assessment Study – Physical, Chemical and Biological Conditions
    Fort Dupont Subwatershed Restoration: 1999 Baseline Stream Assessment Study – Physical, Chemical and Biological Conditions American Eel Anguilla rostrata Prepared for: U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Laurel, Maryland Prepared by: Department of Environmental Programs Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments April 2000 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Project Background Over the past 300 years, farming, urbanization, loss of wetland and forest habitat, erosion, sedimentation and toxic pollution have all taken a tremendous toll on the 176 square mile Anacostia River watershed. After centuries of neglect, the signing of the historic Anacostia River Watershed Restoration Agreement and formation of the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee (AWRC) in 1987 marked the beginning of a concerted and focused effort to restore and protect the river and its tributaries. Since its inception, the AWRC has worked closely with Federal natural resource agencies and landowners such as the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and others to integrate their related programmatic responsibilities and resources into the overall restoration effort. In 1997 staff of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) were hired by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to conduct an ecological impact assessment of Federally-owned lands within the Anacostia, which comprise 15 percent of the total drainage area. As part of that work, COG staff developed a technical analysis of ecological problems and an associated suite of conceptual designs targeted for their correction. Included in the study was the Fort Dupont tributary, which was identified as experiencing stormwater-related runoff problems in its headwaters, and for which conceptual restoration designs were developed.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Washington, D.C.'S Neighborhoods, 2010
    2010 Prepared by Jennifer Comey Chris Narducci Peter A. Tatian Prepared for The Office of Planning The Government of the District of Columbia November 2010 The Urban Institute 2100 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 Copyright © November 2010. The Urban Institute. All rights reserved. Except for short quotes, no part of this report may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the Urban Institute. The Urban Institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy research and educational organization that examines the social, economic, and governance problems facing the nation. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. State of Washington, D.C.’s Neighborhoods iii CONTENTS About this Report ............................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 5 II. Demographics ................................................................................................. 7 Population ................................................................................................................... 7 Households ................................................................................................................12 III. Economy—Jobs and Income .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Capital Parks and Is Not Field for the Nature Student
    NATIONAL CAPITAL t PARKS UNITED STATES Page National DEPARTMENT OF THE Rock Creek Park .8 INTERIOR Anacostia and Fort Dupont OPEN Capital Parks J. A. Krug, Secretary Parks 8 ALL YEAR WASHINGTON Meridian Hill Park 9 19 49 Prince William Forest Park THE MALL and Catoctin Park . 9 FROM THE CAPITOL NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Newton B. Drury, Director Parkway 9 C 0?iT EDIT S Mount Vernon Memorial HE PARKS of the National ated on the remaining reservations Highway 9 Capital embrace 750 reser­ from time to time, the most impor­ The Washington Monument vations totaling approxi­ tant being Lafayette, Judiciary, (Cover) T Roaches Run Waterfowl mately 42,000 acres of land in the Franklin, and Garfield Parks. Sanctuary 10 District of Columbia and its environs, The original areas donated for Page including the Chesapeake & Ohio streets were exceedingly wide and Early History 3 Kenilworth Aquatic Canal, which extends from Washing­ permitted the establishment of parks, ton to Cumberland, Md. The park circles, and triangles at intersections. Gardens 10 The Mall 4 system was established under author­ From such areas came Lincoln, Smaller Parks 10 ization of act of July 16, 1790, and Stanton, Farragut, McPherson, Mar­ The Washington has remained under continuous Fed­ ion, and Mount Vernon Parks; Famous Circles 11 eral control for a period of 159 years. Washington, Dupont, Scott, Thomas, Monument 4 On August 10, 1933, it became a unit and Logan Circles; and many small The White House ... 5 Additional Units of the of the National Park Service. reservations. As the Capital grew in size and The President's Park 5 System 12 EARLY HISTORY importance, additional park areas were acquired including East and The Lincoln Memorial 6 Historic Structures .
    [Show full text]
  • Evacuation Route Reference Map
    Medical Center MONTGOMERY COUNTY Evacuation Route Reference Map Silver Spring DC Routes and Shelters District of Columbia Homeland Security and Bethesda Emergency Management Agency 72hours.dc.gov hsema.dc.gov Walter Reed Takoma PRINCE GEORGE’S Rock Creek Park & College Park-U of Md Piney Branch Parkway 3 Takoma Ed Ctr COUNTY AVENUE CONNECTI 1 Coolidge 47 Lafayette GEORGIA Prince George’s Plaza Ward 4 ENUE CU 13 Brightwood AV T AV Friendship Heights RE ENUE MO TI West Hyattsville 43 Murch BAL Fort Totten ET STRE Tenleytown-AU 37 Woodrow 39 Barnard Fort Totten Wilson 16TH Park WISCONSIN Psychiatric 41 MacFarland Providence Institute Van Ness-UDC Hospital for Sick Children 40 Roosevelt CLARA BARTON PARKWAY AVENUE Ward 3 Georgia Ave Petworth Cleveland Park Sibley 22 Taft 21 Bancroft Washington Brookland-CUA 31 Tubman Veterans 32 Bell Affairs 30 Marshall Multicultural Ward 1 Columbia Heights Children’s Woodley Park-Zoo Ward 5 44 Key Adams Morgan 4 Banneker 24 Reed US HIGHWA Rhode Island Ave Howard AVENUE U St/Cardozo Y 50 Cheverly RHODE ISLAND 18 Ellington 49 Garrison 23 Cleveland Shaw-Howard Dupont Circle Univ Georgetown 14 Dunbar NEW YORK AVENUE Anacostia Park CANAL ROADRiverside 26 Francis Mt Vernon Sq - 7th St NUE New York Ave E Convention Center AV Deanwood ET M STRE 10 Walker-Jones TH GE 12 Thomson OR ID Farragut Terrell 8 - Browne K STREET North 2 Thomas ILW N 6 Burrville KE Farragut Gallery Pl H STREET 27 Spingarn KEY BR McPherson Sq George Foggy West Chinatown Washington Bottom Theodore Roosevelt 38 Stuart-Hobson Minnesota Ave LEE HIGHWAY Island Judiciary Sq BENNING ROAD 46 H.D.
    [Show full text]
  • A Transportation Guide to 5200 2Nd Street, NW
    Washington Latin Public Charter School A Transportation Guide To 5200 2nd Street, NW Table of Contents The Location ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Overview of Transportation Options ………………………………….………………………………………………… 1 Bus Transportation ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Metro Transportation ………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Washington Latin Chartered Bus Service ……………………………………………………………. 3 Carpooling …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 Street Smarts ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Transportation Details by Wards …………………………………………………………………………………………….5 Ward 1 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 Ward 2 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6 Ward 3 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 8 Ward 4 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 Ward 5 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10 Ward 6 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..11 Ward 7 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 12 Ward 8 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 i The Location As of the start of the 2013-14 school year, Washington Latin Public Charter School is located at 5200 2nd Street, NW between Hamilton and Ingraham Streets, on the old site of Rudolph Elementary School. The site, including the gymnasium when completed, will be approximately 75,000 square feet on just over 5 acres and includes a large playing field. We are located in a quiet, residential neighborhood with older buildings populated mostly by older residents and some young families. There are seven schools within
    [Show full text]
  • DC's Neighborhood Clusters
    DC’s Neighborhood Clusters • Cluster 1: Kalorama Heights, Adams Morgan, Lanier Heights • Cluster 18: Brightwood Park, Crestwood, Petworth • Cluster 2: Columbia Heights, Mt. Pleasant, Pleasant Plains, • Cluster 19: Lamond Riggs, Queens Chapel, Fort Totten, Pleasant Hill Park View • Cluster 20: North Michigan Park, Michigan Park, University • Cluster 3: Howard University, Le Droit Park, Cardozo/Shaw Heights • Cluster 4: Georgetown, Burleith/Hillandale • Cluster 21: Edgewood, Bloomingdale, Truxton Circle, Eckington • Cluster 5: West End, Foggy Bottom, GWU • Cluster 22: Brookland, Brentwood, Langdon • Cluster 6: Dupont Circle, Connecticut Avenue/K Street • Cluster 23: Ivy City, Arboretum, Trinidad, Carver Langston • Cluster 7: Shaw, Logan Circle • Cluster 24: Woodridge, Fort Lincoln, Gateway • Cluster 25: NoMa, Union Station, Stanton Park, Kingman Park • Cluster 8: Downtown, Chinatown, Penn Quarters, Mount • Cluster 26: Capitol Hill, Lincoln Park Vernon Square, North Capitol Street • Cluster 27: Near Southeast, Navy Yard • Cluster 9: Southwest Employment Area, Southwest/ • Cluster 28: Historic Anacostia Waterfront, Fort McNair, Buzzard Point • Cluster 29: Eastland Gardens, Kenilworth • Cluster 10: Hawthorne, Barnaby Woods, Chevy Chase • Cluster 30: Mayfair, Hillbrook, Mahaning Heights • Cluster 31: Deanwood, Burrville, Grant Park, Lincoln Heights, • Cluster 11: Friendship Heights, American University Park, Fairmont Heights Tenleytown • Cluster 32: River Terrace, Benning, Greenway, Fort Dupont • Cluster 12: North Cleveland Park, Forest Hills,
    [Show full text]