Policy Center in your inbox

By Will Handsfield, Transportation Director, Georgetown BID

The D.C. Policy Center recently published an analysis of the Georgetown-Rosslyn Gondola by independent research fellow Alon Levy. The Georgetown BID, along with other partners, serves on the Executive Committee of the group exploring this project. And we disagree with certain arguments raised in the article.

Let me begin with a quick summary of the project and our findings from a technical feasibility study we commissioned.

Rosslyn Gondola Station Concept by ZGF Architects, Base image: JBG / Central Place and Cliff Garten Studio

Rosslyn Gondola Station Concept by ZGF Architects, Base image: JBG / Central Place and Cliff Garten Studio

What will the Georgetown-Rosslyn Gondola look like?

The Georgetown-Rosslyn Gondola project[1] would install an aerial lift gondola from a station at 36th Street between M Street and Prospect Street to a station in Rosslyn located above N. Lynn Street at the Metro Plaza. The fare system and rates would be integrated with the region’s system—that is, riders would be able pay for it using their SmarTrip cards.[2]

The project completed a feasibility study in 2016 with the following findings:

 

Proposed gondola stations and alignment (planned buildings in blue)

Proposed gondola stations and alignment (planned buildings in blue)

Let me now turn to the concerns raised by Mr. Levy and address them in the order of importance:

 

Concern: There isn’t much work travel demand between Georgetown and Arlington.

Our response: Instead of only considering work travel demand between Georgetown and Arlington, we need to look at the broader commuting flows into Georgetown. This is because the purpose of the gondola connecting to the Rosslyn Metro Station is not to provide a single-leg trip to those who happen to live in Arlington and work in Georgetown. The Gondola will provide anyone within the Metro catchment area a faster trip to Georgetown. With the Gondola, the total travel time to Georgetown drops to less than 30 minutes for a much larger part of the region, including areas of the District with the greatest need for employment opportunities, giving them a faster way to connect with jobs in Georgetown.

30 minute transit times to Georgetown today (dark green) and with future gondola (light green). Metro lines & stations shown

30 minute transit times to Georgetown today (dark green) and with future gondola (light green). Metro lines & stations shown

Our own numbers derived from payroll information show that between the Georgetown University and the commercial sector, Georgetown is home to 22,000 jobs. This count does not include individuals employed in Georgetown’s households or doing service calls in the area.[4]

Furthermore, employment data does not capture the totality of trip demand to or from Georgetown, which is a bustling destination for locals and tourists well beyond the traditional workday. In fact, our weekend pedestrian counts can be triple what they are on weekdays[5]. Our comprehensive ridership model–prepared by Fehr & Peers –therefore looks at land-use, employment, and trip generation attributes of Georgetown, Rosslyn, and the additional parts of the Metro system that would be accessible within 30 minutes if there were a gondola that links Georgetown to Rosslyn station. Fehr & Peers combine these attributes with the regional MWCOG model to estimate that 6,000 to 15,000 riders would use the Gondola per day. We think 6,500 riders per day is a solid, conservative estimate for usage.

 

Concern: The station on the District side wouldn’t be sufficiently integrated into the local public transit network and would only be convenient for Georgetown University students, and not many others.

Our response:  The station at 36th and M is envisioned to connect to existing bus routes, and the Circulator would modify two routes to serve this station: the crosstown to Union Station and the Rosslyn/Dupont routes would instead be “Car Barn” terminal routes, while the current Georgetown shuttle (GUTS) from GU to Rosslyn Metro would be discontinued and replaced by the Gondola. The latter change alone would lead to about 1,900 daily riders for the gondola. In addition, the 38B, and other 30 series buses could be reconfigured to serve this location. Even relying on existing stops, it is a direct two block walk to 34th/M Street, the same distance as the current Circulator stop is from the Rosslyn Metro.  The project proponents also envision a significant bike parking area at the Georgetown station, similar to what is in place at the Portland Air Tram’s lower terminal.

Portland Air Tram Bike Parking - Image by Steven Vance via Flickr, Creative Commons License
Portland Air Tram Bike Parking – Image by Steven Vance via Flickr, Creative Commons License

On foot, this station would be very walkable from most of Georgetown via the station entrances at Prospect Street and M Street, and very accessible to much of the commercial area. At walking speed from the station, it would take under 9 minutes to reach Wisconsin and M Street, 9 minutes to Medstar hospital, or 14.5 minutes to reach Book Hill Park.

Quarter- and half-mile walkshed radii from the Georgetown Gondola Station.

Quarter- and half-mile walkshed radii from the Georgetown Gondola Station.

Current planning[6] also suggests the re-use of the Glen Echo trolley trail as a multi-use path, which could serve open up neighborhoods west of the University to the gondola station and transit access with a short walk or bike ride.  In total, the future station would be well-integrated with the surface transit network. As it stands, the proposed station location is highly accessible to roughly 14,500 employees of the University and western part of the commercial area,[7] along with another 12,000 residents of the area (including students)[8].

 

Concern: The gondola wouldn’t necessarily save passengers much time over walking, and many people would have a faster time walking to Foggy Bottom.

Our response: “Why can’t people just walk?” is a common criticism we hear. The reality is that today, about 10 to 12 percent of our employee population walks to work in Georgetown and a good portion of that is from the nearby Metro stations. Research on the subject (you can review MWCOG’s work here and a widely used Berkeley study here) suggests that when faced with a walk of a mile or more after exiting their transit station, less than 12 percent of our total employee population is willing to use public transportation for their commute. Given what we know about preferences for walking to or from a transit station, with access to a gondola station at 36th & M/Prospect, around 40 percent of our employee population would be willing to take transit to work. That is a significant difference!

Georgetown Station Massing & Access Study - ZGF Architects

Georgetown Station Massing & Access Study – ZGF Architects

We also must respectfully disagree on the travel time; we have tested it, walked it, timed it, and are extremely confident in our findings, which show that the gondola would be a significant time-saver for many Georgetown commuters compared to existing options. As a comparable thought exercise, imagine taking Judiciary Square out of service on the red line, and requiring thousands of people who work in the area or use the station to instead walk from Union Station. That is also around a 3,700-foot walk, but it really changes how you think about getting there without the direct and proximate transit access.

Image created with Google Maps

Image created with Google Maps

A feature known, but harder to quantify, is that the nature of the walk matters a lot, and we have reviewed much of the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s work on walkability in this context. They consider western Georgetown an area with a strong transit market, but significant transit gaps. Simultaneously, Georgetown has a Walk Score ranging between 90 and 100, among the highest possible.  It is currently a brisk 16-minute walk from Rosslyn Metro to the edge of the Key Bridge in Georgetown, compared to four minutes for the same distance on the gondola from platform to platform.  If you wanted to walk to Prospect Street after crossing Key Bridge, add another four to six minutes and a 60-foot stair climb – the gondola station would have an escalator that would get you there 30 seconds after de-boarding. We know people are willing to walk a little further to transit if the experience on foot is great[9], and there is no question that Georgetown is a wonderful and interesting place to walk—so we are confident more people would make trips from beyond that half-mile ring.

Gondola Station North Entrance area at 36th & Prospect, very walkable. Image made with Google Streetview

Gondola Station North Entrance area at 36th & Prospect, very walkable. Image created with Google Streetview

The bridge walk is a different story: while beautiful, it is not always pleasant. It is often stormy, icy, windy, very hot, or very cold—all conditions in which a gondola ride would seem more appealing. Crossing from Georgetown to Arlington on foot also requires crossing intersections of Lee Highway, GW Parkway off-ramps, and busy surface streets to reach the Metro entrance. Local cyclists use the term “intersection of doom” to describe this area, to give a sense of the ground-level experience.

A section of the "Intersection Of Doom" looking north towards Georgetown. Image created with Google Street View

A section of the “Intersection Of Doom” looking north towards Georgetown. Image created with Google Street View

Similarly, the walk to Foggy Bottom, depending on the route, takes around 15 minutes from the eastern edge of Georgetown, or 25 or 30 minutes from Wisconsin and M Street, and includes some fairly hostile conditions for pedestrians, such as the K St/ 27th Intersection and surrounding environment.

The walking route from eastern Georgetown to Foggy Bottom Metro. Image created with Google Streetview

The walking route from eastern Georgetown to Foggy Bottom Metro. Image created with Google Streetview

Concern: While relatively few Metro riders would elect to use the gondola between Georgetown and Rosslyn, they would nonetheless overload the rail network.

Our response:  If the gondola would serve so few Metro riders, how could they overload the rail network? That contradiction aside, it’s hard to believe that Rosslyn Metro is so busy it can’t take any more riders. It is a very busy station, partly from inter-train transfers, but many of the trips the gondola would facilitate would be from the eastern side of the District. Today, trains headed west from Foggy Bottom to Rosslyn at morning rush hour are frequently less than half-full, and vice versa at the evening rush, as you would expect on trains servicing the core. While the latest train capacity reports for Orange/Blue/Silver line haven’t been published yet, we are confident the additional passengers delivered into the rail system by the gondola would find room on the trains. In addition, not every one of them is going to be an in-bound D.C. passenger: Many will need to head to an airport, or destinations south or west.  It’s clear that the gondola would be a real and useful interconnection with the rail system.

 


 

Besides the arguments against our specific project, Mr. Levy made many statements about gondolas generally that we believe are inaccurate:

Myth #1:  The costs are akin to light rail per mile.

Our response: Because this project spans the Potomac River, it’s unfair to make a direct mileage comparison between the gondola and light rail.  In stating that the costs would be similar per mile, Mr. Levy is either assuming a rail line could and would displace other modes from the existing bridge, or that a new tunnel would be built. However, cost per mile isn’t the right metric to use—cost per rider gets closer to what matters for transit. In this case, the estimated 6,500 daily riders result in a cost per rider of less than one dollar, among the lowest cost per rider of any system in the region.

Myth #2: The average speed of gondolas is low (11-13.5 miles per hour).

Our response: Gondolas compare favorably against the actual speed of buses or streetcars operating on urban roadway networks (8- 12 MPH in DC), and are near the average speed of subway and light rail (13.5 MPH) when you account for the time stopped at stations[10].  The nature of gondolas is fairly different than other fixed-guideway transit, since the cabins are continuously moving through the stations, and the time in between cabins can be as little as 12 seconds.  The most recently built gondola systems have a cable speed of 13.5 miles per hour, while the real speed of buses crossing the Key Bridge corridor is two to five miles per hour. This is because the Key Bridge is a persistent bottleneck in the transportation network—as bridges often are—and suffers from significant daily congestion. The travel time for the Circulator, GUTS, and Metro buses for the same segment is 12 to 30 minutes[11], depending on roadway conditions, versus a consistent four-minute trip on a gondola from platform to platform.

Myth #3: The capacity of gondolas is limited.

Our response: The system we have sketched out, with 23 cabins that will each hold a maximum of 12 passengers, could carry 2,400 passengers per hour, per direction—or 4,800 total passengers per hour. It is true that heavy rail can carry more, but the system has tremendous capacity for the cost, which makes the comparison to a 100-passenger streetcar simply inaccurate.

Myth #4: While costs appear comparable to light rail, it isn’t as easy to build gondolas since the scale of urban rail is larger than what gondolas can serve.

Our response: Mr. Levy is incorrect about the costs being anywhere close to light rail—specifically for the particular leg we are considering, which is between two palisades overlooking a river.  He is also wrong about ease, and time for construction.  We estimate the gondola would be constructed in 18 months, a relatively short duration for a mass-transit project – as an example, the recently opened Mexico City system was built and commissioned in 18 months.

Myth #5: They are only useful in high mountain areas where conventional road and rail systems would be circuitous.

Our response: Mr. Levy’s implication, via omission, is that the places that use gondolas successfully (i.e. Mexico City, Medellin) are mountainous, but that those geographic challenges aren’t present with this system.  While some of the more notable systems have been installed in mountainous areas, many systems cross rivers, which is one of three primary geographic features gondolas excel at crossing (steep slopes, canyons, bodies of water) compared to other transit modes. The systems in Wroclaw, Poland; Koblenz, Germany; and Nizhny Novgorod, Russia were built just to cross rivers. Similarly, the system in Singapore crosses a harbor. Mexico City’s system, to be clear, runs through a relatively flat valley with tremendous density.

 


 

Mr. Levy concludes by saying gondolas are a poor fit for Georgetown’s needs, and argues that the area really needs a Metrorail connection. On this, we agree! But here is where context, timing, and cost matter. A 2014 estimate found that the costs for the separated Blue Line project that would build two Metro Stations in Georgetown would be $12.5 billion ($2.5 billion just for Rosslyn and Georgetown portions), with a construction time between 10 and 14 years.

Preliminary Engineering Diagram of Separated Blue Line (light blue) from Rosslyn through Georgetown, WMATA - 2014

Preliminary Engineering Diagram of Separated Blue Line (light blue) from Rosslyn through Georgetown, WMATA – 2014

By contrast, the gondola could deliver a high-capacity transit hub to western Georgetown, covering the entire University campus and over 50 percent of the commercial district in a half-mile walkshed radius, with a $100 million project that takes 18 months to construct following permitting. It has taken the region 40 years to provide $15.5 billion in dedicated funding to maintain Metro, and it is difficult to estimate when another $12.5 billion will be identified for the separated Blue Line project.

The case is quite clear that the Georgetown-Rosslyn Gondola would be a wise investment for the region, and should build with all possible urgency. We welcome further discussion on the merits of the gondola and the details of its implementation, but we need to start at a point of accurately understanding the capabilities of gondola systems, as well as the specific geographic and sociographic features for the project in question.

 


Rosslyn Gondola Station Concept by ZGF Architects, Base image: JBG / Central Place and Cliff Garten Studio

Notes

[1] A more detailed presentation on the project is available here (PDF).

[2] For Metro riders who are ending or beginning a trip in Georgetown, the crossing would simply be calculated as an additional stop on the Metro system. For riders who are only using the gondola to cross the river, there will be a single one-trip fare developed that is likely to approximate a single stop Metro fare – currently between $2.00 and $2.25. http://www.georgetownrosslyngondola.com/faqs/

[3] We have updated the estimate since the 2016 feasibility study to account for inflation and the increased cost of land acquisition.

[4] The BID’s economic statistics, derived from DOES via the quarterly census of payroll and wages and payroll data from Georgetown University, indicate that in 2017, there were 21,921 paid jobs in the Georgetown BID’s geographical area.

[5] Georgetown BID pedestrian counts collected using Eco-Counter hardware and software.

[6] The MoveDC plan shows the Glen Echo trolley trail as a future multi-use trail. There is great demand from cyclists from Ward 3 to begin developing the trail. Finally, the trail is also in the Georgetown University’s Zoning Approval Order of its 2017 to 2036 Campus Plan.

[7] This estimate includes all of Georgetown University employees and half the commercial employees in Georgetown.

[8] Derived from Georgetown University data and Georgetown BID data available in The State Of Georgetown 2016 Report. The estimate includes the University’s residential population, and one third of the residential population of Georgetown, or the population approximately the size of West Village.

[9] The researchers in this field have a harder time pinpointing the qualitative features that make a place more “walkable,” and applying quantitative outcomes like “how many more people will walk somewhere if it’s a nice walk?”, but it’s clear that walkability has a positive effect on rates of walking.

[10] My regular trip from Foggy Bottom to Stadium Armory takes 22 minutes to travel 5 miles, or 13.5 MPH through the densest section of the Orange/Blue/Silver line route.

[11] Georgetown BID and ZGF Architects travel time logs.

 


Guest contributor Will Handsfield is the transportation director for the Georgetown Business Improvement District, and has worked on transportation projects in Los Angeles, Denver, and the metropolitan Washington region. 

D.C. Policy Center Fellows are independent writers, and we gladly encourage the expression of a variety of perspectives. The views of our Fellows, published here or elsewhere, do not reflect the views of the D.C. Policy Center.

  • Sam Stitt

    OMG! Why is this still a discussion!? This is the most hideous project to ever be cooked up by a bunch of lazy engineers, that have likely never spent time around the Key Bridge area. The last worthless article I read about this, the rendering showed this waste of space and money, staying below the sight line of Key Bridge. Now you morons have it going right over the top of it.

    If anybody has made it this far through my rant, please, buy a bicycle or a nice pair of walking shoes. As a DC area Olympian, I support healthier diets and exercise not only for kids, but adults. Please don’t let this BS about how this is going to save you a (really 10 minute) walk over Key Bridge and make your life easier. Anybody pushing this project doesn’t care about your commute or saving you a scenic walk over the bridge, it’s likely money driven.

    Please, from those of us who have lived here for a long time and coach on the Potomac twice a day every day, don’t read into this sham. It will be ugly, expensive, and frankly there is no justification for it. What is written above is a fabricated opinion with augmented data used to support it.

    Ashamed of your greed,
    Sam Stitt

    • Cali_ExPat

      Hi Sam, I assume you are with WCC or PBC if you are an Olympian. I’m encouraged that you are a devoted Key Bridge walker, but that’s not a choice that very many people make (about 1,600 daily round trips on foot/bike across the bridge according to counters), and our goal is providing a faster, more reliable transit commute for area employees (22,000 of them), and local residents (foremost, the student population, which is around 8,000 undergrads + 4,000 grads). We worked with both PBC and WCC in the feasibility project to make sure any footers in the river (2 of them) are outside of the rowing lanes, so they actually are directly in line with the existing Key Bridge footers, and won’t be an additional obstruction for boating. I hope that helps explain a little our engagement with the clubs, but more will be sure to come.

      As to the money, please tell me how we profit financially from this… I wish that were the case. As it stands, the BID and private parties are set to lay out a big part of our existing revenues, and that’s not going to be paid back by fares or anything else, but it will improve the overall experience of coming to and being in Georgetown, and “improvement” is literally in our name, so the expense is worth it to deliver a major, and long-missing amenity.

      • Sam Stitt

        Sad that I am wasting more time on this since nobody will read it, but here is goes:

        1. Did you ever stop to think that maybe that many people CHOSE to walk/bike/run across Key Bridge to stay in shape? Citing that it is a necessity to cart lazy people from Arlington to spend more money in Georgetown is seen as greed. Read above.
        2. Dropping more “footers” in the river, no matter where you put them, is going to cause obstructions. Everybody already has problems, even at the Olympic level, of avoiding the existing bridge abutments. Crews changing directions at Key Bridge, cross perpendicular to the river on either side of these abutments, which shows your ignorance of the area and unwillingness to care.
        3. Any way you try to dress this up, it will be like putting lipstick on a pig.
        4. Adding “improvement” to your name literally doesn’t change anything, so mentioning that this should ease my worries that you know what you’re doing actually makes it worse.

        I grew up here and live here, so not sure why you are talking to me like I can’t see through this incredibly stupid idea. I’m a salesman by trade and sometimes get negative feedback. You should learn that it is sometimes better just not to respond and let something go, rather than fan the flames with idiotic rhetoric that I am assuming you thought sounded smart. You shouldn’t talk to people like you are smarter than them because you have an agenda.

        I really hope you and your cohorts keep hitting financial walls and have to keep reaching out in desperation for help. Hopefully when this fails, I honestly want you to find me and I will buy all of you a beer. I am not a hateful person and am actually welcoming, but sometimes things like this remind me that greed makes people do stupid things.

        Sincerely,
        Sam Stitt

  • MaryClaireBurick

    Great recap Will!

  • disqus_BjaeEs9d6V

    I’d like to point out several problems in this piece’s defense of the gondola project. I write as a former resident of 36th at Prospect, a former Georgetown undergrad and graduate student, and as someone interested in improving public transport in DC and Georgetown in particular. The problem is not with the general concept of the gondola. While it does on the face of it seem a tad ridiculous, the BID has made a strong case that it’s not inherently such a concept. Rather, the devil, as always, lies in the details, in particular of the station at the Georgetown side. Were they to be addressed the project should continue, but until then I’d urge caution. My comments are not to suggest I do not appreciate the massive headache and traffic engineering challenge that is getting between Rosslyn and Georgetown.

    Most importantly, the precise nature of the station at 36th and Prospect remains unclear and potentially undermines much of the promise of the project, to serve both the University and the rest of Georgetown. Even the diagrams above indicate two different concepts for where it is precisely situated and each has significant problems. In the first, if the station is located at M Street, how exactly are users supposed to get to Georgetown University itself, a major goal of the project as it is meant to replace the GUTS Bus? There seem to be three options. 1) They walk up the Exorcist Stairs, which obviously is unfeasible as part of an average commute after an already 2-seat ride and before then a continued ~10 minute walk, not to mention in winter-time when it could be icy and/or slick. 2) They walk around to 35th street and walk up, however, this is also a very steep road and probably more dangerous in icy/slick conditions and adds yet further time to their commute. 2.5) They walk to 34th street and a walk up but by now you’ve added 7 minutes to the commute (per Google Maps) 3) The station has an elevator somewhere from M Street to Prospect. Again, this seems to add an extra layer of inconvenience to the commute, not to mention expense, not to mention where exactly this elevator would let out on once at Prospect Street. 4) The station includes some sort of stairway from mid-way up over and above the Exorcist stairs, which I imagine runs into historic preservation issues (not that these shouldn’t in some cases be overridden). Assuming that most of the University employee users work either in the hospital or on Main Campus, any of these options, even if they are feasible and/or cost effective in terms of engineering would seem to be a more inconvenient commute that the GUTS bus which lets out much closer to the hospital and other campus buildings. This is also not to mention the inconveniences Levy notes with getting from the bottom of Rosslyn station up to a gondola station platform. Finally, this does not take into account the fact that the GUTS bus is currently free at the point of service. Perhaps the University could subsidize the cost of the gondola for employees but then is it in the University’s interest as much to replace the GUTS bus service? Perhaps, but on the margin less.

    Second, if the station is at the top of Prospect Street (which it is not currently in all the printed materials), this also has problems. A key one is that it makes it harder to link up with existing Metrobus routes that run along M Street but which cannot easily (or at all) get up to Prospect Street. As Alon Levy mentioned, the G2 is the only route that goes through that area of West Georgetown and runs infrequently (even if mostly reliably in my experience). Second, the top of 36th and Prospect, while it would be a nicer walk for users as Mr. Handsfield mentions, can also be seen for what it is from the Google Street image: the middle of a semi-residential area. The examples of existing gondolas do not appear to end in the middle of such a neighborhood and the effect on the neighborhood from putting an industrial-scale piece of infrastructure right in the middle of it ought to be considered. At a minimum, plans for addressing the concerns of neighbors, residential or commercial (principally 1789/Tombs) ought to be addressed before they someone calls a land-use attorney, slowing down and increasing the cost of eventual construction. The diagrams above misrepresent the nature of the housing stock at 36th and Prospect. In the diagram where the station ends at the top of Prospect Street, the station appears to be located on top of what are currently 2 or 3 homes, a comparable one just old for about $4.5 million. One of those is the so-called “Exorcist House” which might have some historical preservation limitations. Have land acquisition costs and or litigation costs and/or delays been factored into the cost/timing of the project? Similarly, in the diagram where the station is located on M street, the diagram suggests that there are 2 or 3 housing plots empty, but again there are houses currently there. The current amount of empty space between the Car Barn patio fence and the beginning of the Exorcist House’s fence is no more than 10 feet wide. I’m as committed as the next guy to maximizing overall social utility, but the costs of accommodating current residents if the station is located on Prospect Street ought to be considered and presented for public consideration of the project.

    Thirdly, the estimates of the walk times from the station were it at Prospect Street (the better location for University employees and therefore shorter than if it were at the bottom of the steps) are somewhat generous. Per Google Maps, the walk from the top of the Exorcist Stairs to the Intercultural Center on Georgetown’ campus is 6 minutes and 11 minutes to the Hospital, and 10 minutes to 31st and M, where the red circle cuts off in the map above. These accord more with my experience walking to and from 36th and Prospect and I say that having grown up walking at New York City speeds, an affliction I have not quite been able to overcome yet. These probably aren’t dealbreakers but the gondola’s proponents should be a tad more scrupulous in their promotional efforts.

    • Cali_ExPat

      Thanks for your comment, and you raise some really valid questions. I am happy to talk in person, but not all of the plan is ready to be on the internet. You can find me at the Georgetown BID office.

      In summary, we have done a couple massing studies with our architects (ZGF), and there is indeed a leading idea which has access to both Prospect and M Street. It doesn’t run into any insurmountable historic preservation issues, and the Exorcist Stairs remain as they are (Andrew Huff made me promise). There are actions the District must take to make that happen, and discussions around exactly that are ongoing, but I hope you can take it on faith at this point that these aren’t new issues to us, and there is a plan to deliver access to both elevations with about the same amount of time it takes to get from mezzanine to platform level at any Metro station.

  • Pepe Silvia

    I will quite literally sacrifice my one and only son if it would get this project done. GONDOLA NOW!

  • FundamentallyCurious

    So what’s in it for Arlington? All I hear is convenience for Georgetown commuters. And running this eyesore in front of an iconic DC view (i.e. the river and Key Bridge) and over the top of a building with historic designation? No thanks. This is filling a need that someone is creating vs. needed. PS- change the culture, get people walking, biking, etc.

    • Sam Stitt

      If there were someway I could like this comment, I would.

You might also be interested in…