Category: Resources

CSG primer: Visualize 2050, our region’s 25-year transportation plan

The draft Visualize 2050 plan, our region’s long-range transportation plan, has too many highway and arterial road expansions that will increase driving and climate emissions. We will miss our region’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 – even if there’s a rapid switch to electric vehicles.

Get informed so you can take action on key decisions this fall: 

  • Upcoming key vote on flawed 495 Southside Express Lanes project 
  • Comment period on failing status quo Visualize plan

Source: TPB, with annotations by the Coalition for Smarter Growth

Background on Visualize 2050

  • Visualize 2050 is our region’s long-range transportation plan, prepared by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB), a regional body overseen by our local and state officials and transportation agencies. 
  • CSG background article
    • From March 2024, on draft project list that is now being presented for final approval this fall along with its performance results. 
  • 48 organizations criticized the previous plan, Visualize 2045 with very similar projects Letter by 48 regional organizations on Visualize 2045 (May 2022)

495 Southside Express Lanes Project

  • The TPB board will vote in October on whether or not to include the Virginia Department of Transportation’s flawed highway expansion project in the final plan.
  • Background on the project’s flaws, questions that VDOT has not answered, and better alternatives that need to be studied and advanced.

Stay tuned for actions you can take this fall!

  • Be on the lookout for CSG action alerts in September and October ahead of the TPB vote on the 495 Southside Express Lanes project.
  • Formal public comment on the entire draft Visualize 2050 plan will take place in late October through mid-November. CSG will provide a more in-depth overview of the draft plan – stay tuned.

Recommendations to ensure an RFK stadium deal benefits DC, provides affordable housing and sustainable transportation options

Our organization advocates for walkable, bikeable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities as the most sustainable and equitable way for the Washington, DC region to grow and provide opportunities for all.

We have been working in the District of Columbia for over 28 years. We have been reviewing the proposal and were drafting this letter highlighting our concerns and recommendations when the news came out today that Chair Mendelson has the outlines of an improved deal. Without having the details of Chair Mendelson’s proposal before us, we will share the following in the hope that we can achieve the best deal possible for the District and its residents.

Prioritize an inclusive, vibrant community at RFK – with or without a stadium

CSG urges the District to prioritize the creation of an inclusive, vibrant community on the RFK Stadium site, including housing options for all, sustainable transportation choices, and community amenities – whether or not there is a professional sports stadium incorporated into the development. 

The administration’s proposal gives away too much, exaggerates economic benefits

Mayor Bowser’s proposed stadium and site development agreement with the Washington Commanders would give unprecedented public subsidies, control of development rights, and tax revenues away to the team. We appreciate the work of Chair Mendelson to reach agreement on an amended deal that directs some revenues and development control back to DC. CSG agrees that a regional sports stadium should be located in an accessible site with good public transit, walking and biking access and that the RFK site can fulfill those prerequisites; however, local and state governments also need to be good stewards of public land and funds. 

Incorporate these critical elements as a modified stadium agreement is considered: 

We ask the DC Council to incorporate these elements to ensure that a deal benefits DC residents and supports adopted District housing, planning and transportation goals:

  1. Ensure housing is built without delay in the Riverfront and Plaza Districts where the team has development rights
    • Establish controls, milestones, and clawbacks to ensure housing, affordable housing and supportive neighborhood retail and services are built in a timely manner.
    • We are glad to see that the amended agreement by Chair Mendelson includes deadlines for completion of nonstadium uses with penalties. We look forward to seeing more details on this and hope that it ensures timely housing and mixed-use development.
    • The Mayor’s deal did not provide any guarantees that the sports team will develop the adjacent sites for mixed-use development that supports city goals. Under that agreement, the Commanders could indefinitely use these as “temporary” surface parking.
  2. Require all residential development at the site follow the affordable housing requirements of DC’s public land disposition law
    • These include a 30% set aside of affordable housing at 30% and 50% median family income (MFI) for rental, and 80% MFI for ownership units in perpetuity (Code of the District of Columbia § 10–801), leveraging the land value as the first source of subsidy.
    • Land should be leased with covenants for affordability requirements.
  3. Replace parking subsidies with expanded public transit, walking and biking
    • The District of Columbia would spend over $350 million to build the largest parking garages in the city under the current deal, structures that would loom over the Kingman Park neighborhood.
    • Most of these funds should instead be used to improve transit, walking and biking access to and within the new neighborhood and stadium.
    • Specific improvements should include:
      • Metrorail station and service improvements. 
      • Bus priority lanes on H Street NE.
      • Improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities on the Benning and East Capital Street bridges to improve access from areas east of the river. 
    • We appreciate the redirection of $600M from the sports facility fee to upgrading the Stadium-Armory Station – and we believe that the District could gain greater savings – and needed investment in its public transportation system – by not subsidizing parking garages that will largely sit empty most of the year.
  4. Redirect more public revenues back to the District through revenue sharing agreement
    • We appreciate Chair Mendelson’s negotiation for some shares of revenues to come back to DC. But we think that the District can do better than receiving $779M spread out over 30 years given the large total subsidy. More revenue should be shared with the District beginning right after the first $500 million in debt is paid off.
  5. Require a strong performance-based Transportation Demand Management Plan
    • The TDM plan should include performance-based metrics to shift more trips to transit, walking, and biking, consistent with the targets of the District’s adopted MoveDC plan.
  1. Protect and improve public recreation access and community amenities 
    • Protect and ensure the continuation of existing community recreational and other uses on the RFK site, both during construction and after. These include parks, recreation, and sports facilities as well as uses such as the farmers market.
    • Expand The Fields recreation facilities, building on their high demand. 
    • Per the Comprehensive Plan, improvements should include the creation and maintenance of a pedestrian and cyclist shoreline access path and well-designed public spaces.

We urge the Council to ensure that DC residents will benefit from an RFK development plan and commitments that include housing options for all, sustainable transportation choices, and community amenities – whether or not there is a professional sports stadium incorporated into the development. 

In-Person Testimony: 495 Southside Study

In-Person Testimony: 495 Southside Study

From the beginning the VDOT study has been fatally flawed by a conclusions-first approach – defining their purpose and need as “extending express toll lanes” which forecloses other alternatives. Moreover, they have not provided all the information necessary for an informed decision – particularly the traffic impact on connecting roads. Given the missing information and strong concerns expressed by Fairfax, Prince George’s, Alexandria, Charles, WMATA, and state legislators in Virginia and Maryland, this project is not ready for inclusion in the regional plan.

Testimony: Support for Z.C. Case No. 13-14E, modification to Parcels 2 and 4 (Reservoir District formerly known as McMillan)  (DC)

Testimony: Support for Z.C. Case No. 13-14E, modification to Parcels 2 and 4 (Reservoir District formerly known as McMillan) (DC)

July 17, 2025

Mr. Anthony Hood

Chairman, Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia

441 4th Street, NW, Suite 210S

Washington, DC 20001

RE: Support for Z.C. Case No. 13-14E, modification to Parcels 2 and 4 (Reservoir District formerly known as McMillan)

Dear Chairman Hood:

Please accept this testimony on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. CSG advocates for walkable, bikeable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities as the most sustainable and equitable way for the Washington, DC region to grow and provide opportunities for all.

We wish to express our support for the proposed modifications to this PUD (13-14E) for the Reservoir District to allow for greater flexibility given changing conditions over the decade that this proposal has been waiting to move forward. The changes also include increased affordable housing, and more housing overall. These modifications will help ensure this long sought after project will be able to be completed and fulfill the promise of this major development.

We are pleased to see that the proposal now includes 30% MFI affordable housing — something that we called for in our 2014 testimony. We ask that the affordable units be committed to in perpetuity, which is the standard for public land dispositions under law. I note that Inclusionary Zoning retains the affordable units for the life of the development. Thus either way, DC regulations set a permanent term as the standard for publicly-supported affordable housing. 

The proposed senior units are 39 30% MFI, 86 50% MFI, and 16 60% MFI. We are also pleased to see an increase in affordable senior homes at the site. We remain hopeful that the project will also receive a HANTA program tax abatement to include more 80% MFI units (with a term of 40 years). This will be an important contribution to housing equity for the neighborhood and city.

We support the other modifications and flexibility to secure a grocery store. The proposed changes are within reasonable parameters. We recognize that the commitment of a full scale grocery store like Harris Teeter cannot be necessarily sustained for 10 years, and that the market economics have changed significantly in that time. We are hopeful that the developer can keep the current smaller format grocer commitment for the site. DC has several high quality smaller grocers like Streets that are essentially full service. These kinds of smaller grocery stores are great assets to their communities. 

We hope the plan can continue to retain sufficient ground floor retail uses to animate the street and provide services to residents, along with visitors and workers at the nearby hospitals. The request for lodging makes sense given the world-class hospital and health services across the street. The retail, lodging and public spaces are a way to enhance the hospital district, which is a major center for private employment in DC. 

We, of course, support the proposed reduction in parking — which is still far above what is required. Oversupply of parking is a cost burden. We support enhanced bus service to the site, along with better walk and bike access. 

We note that the Reservoir District is rapidly becoming a reality with a major new park, recreation center, playground, and indoor swimming pool. This was first to deliver, and now the townhouses are coming on line. The preservation of historic structures and integration of these structures into the site and the recreation center stands out as a distinctive feature for the neighborhood. Providing the flexibility to secure the buildout of the hundreds of mixed income homes with ground floor retail, including a grocery store, is needed to realize the promise of this major new neighborhood district. We ask the Zoning Commission to approve this modification without delay. 

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Cort

Policy Director

Testimony: Remove M-83 from County Plans (MoCo Council, July 2025)

Testimony: Remove M-83 from County Plans (MoCo Council, July 2025)

We urge you to adopt the recommendations of the Planning Board and remove the unbuilt northern portion of M-83 from the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways.

M-83 is not the right path forward to provide better transportation options upcounty. The ways of thinking that informed plans for this road decades ago are fundamentally out of step with what we know today about best practices to address transportation needs, and about the vital connections between environmental health, climate resilience, and human health.

Event: Zoning for Positive Change in DC

Event: Zoning for Positive Change in DC

How can plans and zoning regulations shape vibrant, mixed-use, walkable communities? On April 23, 2025 we hosted a discussion with Code Studio, one of the national leaders on using innovative form-based approaches to zoning to guide change and protect what’s best about our neighborhoods. 

Speakers: Colin Scarff and Rene Biberstein, Code Studio; Moderated by Ellen McCarthy, Ward3Vision

This event is part of our informational series as the District kicks off DC 2050 — the Comprehensive Plan rewrite in spring of 2025.

Review the recording on YouTube here.

cover slide
Code Studio

Co-sponsored by Coalition for Smarter Growth and Ward3Vision

Written Recommendations: MoCo’s More Housing N.O.W. Package

Written Recommendations: MoCo’s More Housing N.O.W. Package

Montgomery County has a strong record of supporting subsidized affordable housing, including making historic commitments to funding for affordable housing these past few years.

We have not been innovators in the same way in making sure our county has homes that are affordable to our middle class, young people, older adults looking to downsize, and others who do not qualify for affordable housing—yet are increasingly unable to find market-rate homes they can afford amongst our limited housing options.

In-Person Testimony: MoCo More Housing N.O.W. Package

In-Person Testimony: MoCo More Housing N.O.W. Package

It is a plain and simple fact that our county needs more housing. People want housing that they can afford, and they do not want to have to spend their lives sitting in traffic just to get to work. 

Nothing demonstrates the strong support for these simple ideas more than the broad, diverse coalition that showed up in support of the announcement of the More Housing N.O.W. package.