Silver Spring Transit Center: A Disaster in the Making
By Silver Springer • Aug 18th, 2006 • Category: Rating the Projects: The Best and the Worst
Out of all the developments not yet completed, this is the largest and most important project in terms of whatever you can imagine, from federal/tax payer funding to social and economic impact. It will set the bar for the rest of the D.C. area from Bethesda to Arlington, all on the most valuable piece of real estate in Silver Spring. Unfortunately the bar is being set pretty low. Over $50 million in federal funding is being dropped on a project that has taken drastic steps back.
For those who know little about the development. The Silver Spring Transit Center is a public\private partnership between the main principals that include Montgomery County Government, WMATA and Foulger Pratt. The plan is to create a multi-modal transit center that combines all forms of transit in the area into one single location, this includes ride-on, metrobus and rail, MARC, commuter buses, cabs, Intercity buses (Greyhound) and the Bi-County Transit (Purple Line). The project will include a three tiered bus facility surrounded by a private component consisting of three high-rise buildings. The high-rises will include two condominium buildings and a hotel with at grade vault parking
To give a perspective of how big a mistake this project is, take a look at what we were going to get,
and this is what we are getting instead.
I have found numerous contradictory statements in different reports from Planning, Montgomery County Government and WMATA.
According to the Silver Spring Transit Center Environmental Assesment and Section 4(F) Evaluation December 2004 Final Draft, “The design of the existing Silver Spring METRO Station does not reflect the prominence of one of the most heavily used transit facility in the State of Maryland nor does it complement the surrounding architecture of the Silver Spring CBD. The site is the central transit hub for the CBD. The Project will establish a strong overall architectural statement that promotes the use of public transit and contributes to the revitalization of the Silver Spring CBD. The Project will help meet the demand put on mass transit by these projects and will bring the transit facilities qualitatively into line with the surrounding areas. It will also bring the infrastructure to current standards of surrounding new development. The Project will create transit-oriented development in accordance with Maryland’s Priority Places Strategy.â€
From the current renderings and site plans, I don’t think the proposed Silver Spring Transit Center “reflects the prominence of one of the most heavily used transit facility in the State of Marylandâ€, nor does it have a strong design that will enhance it. In fact it looks economical, not the grand station we envisioned at all. With a few notable exceptions, for the most part the Silver Spring CBD has a weak architectural presence. Most of the architectural forms are brutalist 60’s designs; 80’s vernacular with tacky stripes galore and the current era of boxes with windows. The question becomes is this what we want to emulate on to the transit center or do we want to break from the status quo?
Another contradictory statement proclaims, “The three components of the transit-oriented/joint development will be designed in a manner to balance with the Transit Center and afford the maximum potential for pedestrian comfort/convenience, overall structural design and cost efficiency. A key aspect of development is the intent not to exceed the zoning-code controlled maximum building height of 200 feet above building entry grade for each of the three main buildings (office, hotel and residential).†Further more, “The Silver Spring CBD is a highly urbanized area and the site, itself, currently contains no buildings but it is surrounded by high-rise development. The plans for the project site are in keeping with the urban character of the Silver Spring CBD. The Project has been carefully designed to enhance the surroundings of the project area while serving its major function as a safe and convenient transit center. Street level retail will contribute to creating an attractive, welcoming public space. The urban plaza and park will be the focus of pedestrian activity. Care has been taken to locate the buildings on the site so as to maximize the amount of sunlight in the urban plaza and park.â€( Silver Spring Transit Center Environmental Assesment and Section 4(F) Evaluation December 2004 Final Draft).
Highly urbanized means extreme density and height. How can you look at increased height as erroneous but at the same time want to keep within the character of “highly urbanized†Silver Spring? Explain the logic in not exceeding “the zoning-code controlled maximum building height of 200 feetâ€; is there some sort of ceiling in the sky inhibiting them from going taller? I could understand if the site was at the edge of Fenton Village but it is not. This is the center of downtown Silver Spring, the largest urban area in the state outside Baltimore City. Every urbanized area has their tallest buildings in their core. If you agree that it is a highly urbanized area, then what is the meaning of the strict height limitations in its core? I would really like to know the reasoning behind that statement.
The county and planning proclaim that this project upholds the Silver Spring sector plan but that couldn’t be further from the truth,
“The Sector Plan specifically supports the development of the Project. While the Sector Plan does not describe the Project in detail, it’s mix of transit, office, residential, hotel, retail and open space/park uses supports all six themes outlined in the SectorPlan:
• transit-oriented downtown
• commercial downtown
• residential downtown
• civic downtown
• green downtown
• pedestrian-friendly downtown
As a transportation hub with the potential for substantial new housing, office, and retail development, Silver Spring is poised to take advantage of the State’s commitment to enhanced transit opportunities. The Project’s transit-oriented/joint development will encourage people to live, work, shop and entertain themselves in downtown Silver Spring. The Project will allow residents and visitors access to on-site retail, office, hotel and residential uses without the need for an automobile[yet include strict parking requirements];supply upgraded and additional open space, and provide a new Transit Center and transit-oriented/joint development that integrates into the fabric of downtown Silver Spring.†( Silver Spring Transit Center Environmental Assesment and Section 4(F) Evaluation December 2004 Final Draft).
Further more,
“The goals of the SSTC project are:
• Provide a first-class,state-of-the-art transit center with room for growth;
• Provide efficient connections between existing and anticipated modes of transportation (to include bicycle to bus and bicycle to rail connections);
• Strengthen pedestrian connections;
• Create a safe secure, maintainable, and inviting
environment; and
• Meet the objectives stated in the adopted Silver Spring
Central Business District Sector Plan:
o Create a varied and active town center with housing, office, and retail
development in a pedestrian-friendly environment, enhanced with parks and
open spaces;
o Develop quality open space and amenities
o Achieve the investment, value, and functional benefits
of transit-oriented development; and
o Maximize the visibility and sunlight for the public spaces.â€(WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT).
The last time I checked the office component was dumped, no white collar worker will be employed at the transit center because there no place for them to work. It has negated from incorporating any green design elements, retail is inadequate and the whole project wasn’t designed to be inviting. This makes it unable to qualify for being first-class and state-of-the-art.
There are several specific problems with the transit center,
1. Destroys a view: The arrangement of the buildings in the planned private development, their location in relation to the bus facility and the immediate existing buildings are highly illogical and they totally disregard the existing environment. First off they wall in the site, giving an uninviting vibe to anyone exiting or entering the transit center. The first thing anyone will see when getting off the metro rail are two condo buildings and a hotel. They will block the view of the Discovery building and the rest of the wide open Silver Spring skyline. So much for Shark Week?
Solution? Consolidate the three separate buildings into one or two, remove the center building (Condo building one) and transfer the height and density south. In other words gradually increase the height from Colesvile Road towards Bonifant and Ripley Streets.
2. Inadequate height: This is where the tallest buildings in the county should be, it is the core of downtown Silver Spring, so why are the proposed buildings lower in height than what already exists? This would be a great opportunity to create an abundance of affordable housing. The increased heights would also be a major selling point to the developer whether residential or office. If you’re hoping for great views tough luck, the buildings won’t be taller than anything existing, so even if you can afford the penthouse suite you’d be lucky enough to see the top of the Washington monument. The center of a city should be zoned for the maximum possible height for elevation higher than anything else existing. This means the transit center site should be zoned CBD-3 or TS-M like adjacent properties and other less urban parts of the county. This is highly absurd and defies transit oriented smart growth. Parking requirements should not be an issue since you’re literally living on top of a metro station.
3. Environmentally unfriendly: “DPWT will not apply for U.S. Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the Transit Center. The applicant provided a scorecard summary that estimates the number of points that the project would likely receive if certification was requested. DPWT estimates that 16 points (out of a possible 68 points) would likely be credited and 27 points would be possible. At least 26 points are needed for LEED Certification. Most of the points in the estimated score for the Transit Center would be for indoor environmental air quality (within several small enclosed spaces), use of a sustainable site, and improved energy efficiency. †(According to the Mandatory Referral 04106-MC-1). Another cost cutting measure on very important tax payer funded project. High performance buildings are quickly becoming mainstream but government officials are not even considering it in a public project that they expect to last 50 years.
4. Not true to mixed use: There retail was grossly reduced and there is no office component but planners are quoted many times to stating the opposite. Common sense says that you try to take advantage of transit patrons through retail and enourage to visit the rest of downtown not wall them in. This is a project that should not be taken lightly it is too important for it to swing like a pendulum to any change in market conditions. Because it is a public project designed to serve public needs it is imperative that it is designed for the long-term. That being said it is essential that it has an abundance of all three primary uses of a good mixed use project, retail, residential and office.
5. Incohesive design: Compared to the previous design this is a group of fragmented parts glued together not an integrated design that looks like a single transit station. Far worst is the fact that the 30 year old metro rail ticketing area and platform are not getting redesigned. The bus facility will be glued to it through a patchwork of bridges. A south entrance evaded the minds of planners leaving the community and politicians like Aaron Klein to jump through more hoops to try and secure funding for it. I fully comprehend that the renderings are for functional purposes but the intent in the arrangement of the private development and bus facility are already spoken for. Several final site plan configurations have already been chosen and none of them are acceptable. The buildings in the private development continue to follow the same principals.
If you can’t tell already I’m deeply disappointed in this project, instead of a grand station we are ending up with a glorified bus garage. It is a waste of federal and county funds that politicians like Aaron Klein worked so hard to acquire and secure. In 30 years or less the next generation will be left holding this misfortune and will have to end up demolishing it to do what should have been done in the first place.
While wasting ten years due in part to the bureaucratic process, construction costs have gone through the roof. Leaping from design to design and wasting a lot of money in doing so; the final two years you’re scrambling to put something together and cutting essential components to be on budget. In the end the final design is worst of all. You were on budget but the community loses out big time. This is the story of the Silver Spring Transit Center. Why build a station that is expected to last 50+ years at all if you’re not going to do it right? Shouldn’t we make the effort to do it right instead of rushing it through?
Alternating between the first and second busiest station in all of Maryland, the Silver Spring station is used by nearly 60,000 patrons a day. Isn’t that deserving of a no-compromise project? Set the NIMBYs and bureaucracies aside this time and focus on building the grand station the community wanted. But maybe I should stand corrected; this is Silver Spring after all so it’s ok to do a half-assed job?
Parties Involved:WMATA,Montgomery County, the Maryland Mass Transit Administration, the Maryland Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration, Montgomery County Department of Public Works and Transportation (DPWT).
Private Component Developer: Silver
Spring Metro, LLC (Foulger Pratt)
Architect and Site Plan design: Zimmer, Gunsul and Frasca
Location: Silver Spring Station
Project Specifications:
Site: Approx 5.24 acres divided between private and public components
Public component Heights: Ranging from 50′ to 76′Feet
Private development height(s): Maximum 200′feet
Contacts:
Shri Gondhalekar
shri.gondhalekar@montgomerycountymd.gov
Glenn Kreger
Glenn.Kreger@mncppc-mc.org
Silver Springer is
Email this author | All posts by Silver Springer
Fantastic post. Very informative. Nice work.
Thing is, the grand plan looked really grand…too grand in my opinion.
No matter what this whole thing is going to cause an almighty mess in downtown SS before it manages to make everything more efficient (hopefully).
In which case I’d quite frankly prefer it if the county went for efficiency over style. “Urban park” designs always worry me b/c they inevitably become centers for some kind of crime and don’t attract “lollygaggers” unless there are decent businesses there of some sort. I really doubt that anyone will ever want to say, “Hey let’s go get a [four star dinner] at the transit center.”
Bottom line, as long as the money is used wisely and the construction proceeds on schedule (roughly) and the damn thing functions as it should, then I’ll call it a success.
While I really liked the original design by Torti Gallas, I think the jury’s out until we see some renderings of what the Transit Center buildings will look like. And I’m definitely not looking forward to what the area will look like when this thing’s being built.
“I really doubt that anyone will ever want to say, ‘Hey let’s go get a [four star dinner] at the transit center.’”
I disagree, especially because the retail part, while it may be part of the project as a whole, would not front railroad tracks or bus loading docks. Union Station hold many a fine restaurant, so does the Bethesda transit center, which is a better comparison (almost perfect) than Union Station.
I also agree with thecourtyard. The first plans by Torti Gallas were absolutely perfect. They created a design that people would recognize, admire, and want to visit.
With all due respect to the author of the original post (who always has good insight and information), you do not have a correct perspective on this project. Given the dearth of information made public on its final design, you are really in no position to do anything other than speculate (which you have done in abundance).
The CONCEPT illustrations that you posted as the “after design” are nothing more than than that…just like the original concepts in the “before design”. The main reason the first design is more appealing is that the rendering shows more architectural detail. The “after design” concept is nothing more than a computer generated drawing showing massing of buildings and uses…a very common way for architects and designers to generate a quick feel for how the final project might feel. This has nothing to do with architectural details, landscape architecture, landscaping or the myriad of other decorating type details that can take the blandest of designs and make it beautiful.
You mention the arrangement of the buildings in the new design as being displeasing. The buildings are in nearly the exact same position as in the original design concept (note again, the word concept).
You say that the new design doesn’t relate to the surroundings or the existing conditions, but you do not explain why.
While everyone is welcome to their opinions, you must back yours up with concrete reasons why you express such dissatisfaction.
PS…I have absolutely no connection with this project, but I am an urban planner who commonly deals with people who look at conceptual design studies and believe that it is the final product. The county has said many times that the drawings released to the public are nothing more than detailed studies.
Wait until more “final” design elements are released and if it is still awful to you, then start complaining. For now, though, the complaints are quite premature.
Anonymous: We found out and read previously from the concept designer that these are obviously concepts, but that the architectural design will not be too far from its arrangement. So yes, it is premature to completely write it off (I certainly haven’t), but what we’ve been seeing and hearing (especially concerning its ridiculously low height) is not promising.
No complaint is premature especially if it makes people think and reconsider their design. It’s best to target something before it’s built than complain after the fact when nothing can be done about it. The fact that the developers are considering a second design says alot about their mindset. One thing about this station is that once anything is incorporated into it we can’t destroy it when it becomes outdated and grotesque, years down the line. I really hope the developers think twice about this design and get more options on the table, also listen to everyone’s opinion. A mistake this big will be hard to correct especially when we are talking about the most heavily used metro station site.
Just to clarify, Silver Spring isn’t the busiest metro station by far, but it is the busiest transit center in Maryland.
Thank you all for posting,
To Anon: While I am aware that current site design, renderings etc are intended to be conceptual in reality they are about 80% of the final design. The height and arrangement of the buildings, the design of the bus facility, the eliminated retail along Colesville Road (all I have heard is a small amount of retail on the third level of the bus facility and a bike store being a tenant) are intended to be set in stone at this point. These are statements I’ve heard straight from the developer, lead designer and officials with my own two ears.
The only thing left to do is create a facade and alter other small details onto the highrises
and bus facility. The major inherent flaws are not being corrected.
The previous design by Torti Gallas and Partners doesn’t block the skyline nearly as much as the current design which literally walls in the site. The previous design tried best to push much of the density south towards Bonifant and the rail road tracks (with a lot less building height to work with). It does a much better job of consolidating the structures and looking like one integrated station yet fits in with the rest of Silver Spring.
In fact looking at the previous design some great views could have been seen from the roof top terrace. That would have made a nice entertainment destination and provided for a park all at once. This also indicates that there was an intention to provide a sustainable building design but the current one gave up on this idea entirely.
The atrium\canopy is gone which was an excellent yet aesthetically pleasing and efficient way to let light into the entire station. This is unlike the method used by the current designers, they actually eliminated half of the third level to try to achieve the same goal and light still won’t penetrate as much of a floor area as the previous design allowed and it doesn’t look good.
“You say that the new design doesn’t relate to the surroundings or the existing conditions, but you do not explain why.†To the contrary I did in several points.
1.There is no office component to provide a new class A building that is really needed in the CBD and to make it a true mixed use project. It was even pointed out as being a component erroneously in several statements by planners.
2.It doesn’t comply with the Silver Spring Sector plan asking for a “Tent- effect†from the core of the city out. The new buildings will be shorter than what exists measured from equivalent grades.
3.It blocks the view of the skyline instead of respecting it.
“Wait until more “final” design elements are released and if it is still awful to you, then start complaining. For now, though, the complaints are quite premature.â€
The plans for the private development have already been submitted to the planning dept months ago. WMATA and county public meetings have already been held and the plans are about 80% final. They expect construction to start in June 2007.
The transit center is not all about getting buses in and out in an orderly fashion, it represents Silver Spring in a major way and should be a grand mixed use project. Efficiency does not have to equal dull, ugly and less grand. The current design is one that overemphasizes function of the bus facility over form in the rest of the parts. It can’t find a balance between the two.
To pennster: Thanks for the info. By the way do you have a link to that or figures?
Using Metro during rush hours you can tell that while Silver Spring is very busy, it is nowhere near as busy as many others in central DC, especially transfer stations. The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2006/03/22/AR2006032201172.html copy/paste the link) states that 57,000 people use the station today (including Metro, taxis, and buses), and that number will climb to 97,000 in less than 15 years (a very conservative estimate, no doubt). Of current users, 25,000 use Metrorail at Silver Spring daily, 20,000 use buses and 12,000 use Ride-On buses.
On WMATA’s website I found that Union Station and Metro Center are the two busiest stations, but their numbers do not match up with their statement about Silver Spring, which is not included in the top 10, but would be 4th if their numbers were consistent. The top 10 busiest is only of weekdays, however, so I’m not sure how including weekends would affect the numbers.
I found other pictures of their conceptual plan, which makes it look like the buildings are taller than 200 feet, but still don’t reach the height of surrounding buildings. The pictures are located at http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/ crzytwnman/silverspringtransitcenter.jpg, http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/ crzytwnman/silverspringtransitcenter3.jpg, and http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/ crzytwnman/silverspringtransitcenter2.jpg.
You have to copy/paste the links into your browser, and delete the space. Unfortunately our posts can’t include any sort of complex html.
I will definitely bring up the transit center during my meeting with the planning department planners on Tuesday, however, I won’t be able to make too much of a point with them (read: throw a fit) as they may be my future employers. What may be more effective at this point is for all of us here to write letters to the department, which I could deliver using my commission email address or in person. Let me know which of you guys will write something (probably no more than 500 words, I doubt they’d want to read anything more than that).
To anonymous again: The buildings are not in the same arrangement as they were in the Torti Gallas concept. The buildings should be arranged so that they somewhat resemble open French doors, so that some or most riders on a Metro train would be able to see into the heart of downtown from the train. Of course, if the train isn’t at a sufficient grade to see anything, then I suppose the building arrangement doesn’t matter much.
I can’t believe how naive you are about the role of the market in development. Why don’t they just stick an office building in there, after all we need more Class A Office space. Why don’t they just put some more retail in there after all we want a real mixed use project.
First of all the Torti Gallas design was before CSX required more distance away from their tracks and before MTA wanted right of way for a double track for the Bi-County Transitway. So the site got much smaller and had to be totally redesigned. Also rising construction costs and the underground rock meant that the transit center could not go back into the hill as much as it had.
The Office was taken out because developers don’t build spec office space so it could have been some time before the office could be constructed meaning that the office would be built after the transit center was finished adding years to the disruption. Also the configuration of the office building and the columns needed to support it over the transit center was conflicting with the turning movements needed for buses. So it was taken out. The hotel is going on the Colesville side.
Retail is being put in the ground floor of all of the buildings. Where else could you put more, the second floor? Second floor retail is tough. There could be no parking onsite for the retail so it would have to be destination or convenience retail and smaller (less than 5,000 sf) spaces, not retail like Bed Bath and Beyond, etc.
The drawings you used for the project are massing plans and you obviously didn’t understand them. The project is in three levels all levels are open to the west side. The lowest level has direct access to the metro and is entered throught the park from the corner of Wayne and Colesville. It is also open along the west side and has an open area in the center that will allow natural light and air to circulate. The mid level is entered at the upper level of a park that is accessed from the corner of Wayne and Ramsey. This level is not covered on the west half. So it gets plenty of light. Both lower levels will have a ceiling height of 18 to 20 feet. The top level is over only half of the transit center and is for taxis and kiss and ride and will be landscaped and look much like a typical Silver Spring streescape.
You confused me because you complained that the buildings were only 200 feet which is the maximum limit allowed by Montgomery County’s zoning. Then you complained that the buildings were not shorter like in the Torti Gallas design. Which do you want?
Armchair urban designer who don’t understand the limitations of the site, the budget, the requirements of multiple users can easily sit at home and say why this project is all wrong.
Anonymous seems reluctant to give him/herself a name.
Either way, we all understand what the limitations and market support (which makes it odd, at this point, to include more residential and no office, as office space is needed in DTSS, while excess residential is not necessary). The Torti Gallas design was better (like we said before, we know these are concept plans) but obviously Silver Springer has spoken to relevant people about this. Despite the building heights in its design, TG had created a prominent entrance and appropriate building arrangement. Obviously that is what was meant.
If you know so much about the project, give us your sources. I’ll be meeting with the two planners in charge of Silver Spring on Tuesday. I work in MNCPPC.
Yuck the new one is hideous, Seems like a lot of the constraints are because of the dumb height restrictions.
Excellent post and follow up commentary everyone.
As another trained urban planner, whoever is busy defending the current iteration of the transit center and asking people to basically cool their jets is the one that truly doesn’t understand the importance, impact and scope of this project on Silver Spring’s future.
So a few hurdles got in the way, as one who apparently knows and works in the world of development this shouldn’t be a surprise and to claim that office space isn’t built on spec. is absurd. Take a ride down the red line someday and count how many 1000s of sqft. of commercial space signs you see on currently constructed bldgs.
I’m looking forward to seeing the final design, but agree with the overall sentiment expressed here. The transit center is the most important piece of land in SS and the most important gateway to the city. It should be grand. Perhaps it will but the conceptual design presented inadequately acknowledges this fact, undermining the city’s potential and apparently many of our hopes.
On building heights: the county does have maximum height restrictions. This is a matter of delicate political compromise between people who want higher building densities and people who don’t want Montgomery to resemble Manhattan. Whether WMATA is subject to height restrictions is an interesting questions, but even if it isn’t, I doubt they would be exceeded due to political considerations.
You say this is the center of Silver Spring and thus it deserves tall buildings, but that to me brings up two interesting questions: first, is the Metro the center of Silver Spring? Before Metro was built, the center of the community was the Georgia Avenue corridor, which is probably about a quarter of a mile from the Metro. Only after Metro opened did we see high-rise construction near the site. The result has been a Silver Spring with a binary center of sorts. Second, even if it is the center, does that mean it needs tall buildings? In my view, what is missing from Silver Spring is a town square and green space (the Ellsworth mall provides neither of these.) Exceedingly tall buildings could suffocate a public square.
According to planners I’ve spoken with at the Planning Dept, yes Silver Spring has two nodes of sorts. One is the Metro station, and one is the corner of Colesville and Georgia Avenue, which really are only separated by one block occupied by the Discovery Center. The traditional center at Colesville and Georgia was superseded by the Metro station when it was built, that which is the node in most other planning areas in Montgomery County. The tallest buildings are zoned around this area. The maximum height for buildings at the station would be 200 feet using the optional method because it is zoned CBD-2 (and yes, WMATA is subject to all Montgomery County regulations, including height restrictions).
But the issue here isn’t really about “people who want higher building densities and people who don’t want Montgomery to resemble Manhattan.” That will never happen, at least during my lifetime. The issue is why the Metro station is zoned for less density than the areas around it (including the Silver Spring Metro Center (NOAA), Silver Spring Metro Plaza (AT&T), Silver Spring Centre, and other areas—the new Marriott, for one). The Metro property is the hole in the donut, so to speak, and the zoning there really doesn’t have any rhyme or reason. Unfortunately, the hurdles to changing the zoning to CBD-3 to match the properties around the Metro land seem to be too much for the developers. Here is a link to the zoning in the Silver Spring CBD: http://www.mc-mncppc.org/silverspring/
maps/sscbd_existingzone.jpg (you have to delete the space when pasting the URL in your browser).
In addition, the Civic Center area where the old parking garage used to be and where a field of fake grass exists now will function as the “town square.” So yes, I do believe that the center should have the tallest buildings and densities, not only because it makes sense, but also because Montgomery County regulations calls for this “tent-like” arrangement in its master plans.
“The Office was taken out because developers don’t build spec office space so it could have been some time before the office could be constructed meaning that the office would be built after the transit center was finished adding years to the disruption. Also the configuration of the office building and the columns needed to support it over the transit center was conflicting with the turning movements needed for buses. So it was taken out. The hotel is going on the Colesville side.”
I’m sure everyone with the knowledge was aware of how asinine that statement was.
I just spoke with a civil engineer who just completed an office building in Florida and he told me there is virtually no difference between the construction of a residential highrise or an office highrise. As another Anonymous poster pointed out, speculative space is being built all over D.C. and 10x as much in Virginia.
Is the oringinal poster trying to turn Silver Spring and the county into a bedroom community?
Where are all these people suppose to work and if we do not provide jobs won’t that exacerbate the traffic problems?
The reason for the two condo towers is because Foulger wants more money, nothing more. But now that the condo market is drying up what is he going to do?
To Omari, the metro station is the core. One particular reason for this is because the land zoned around it is zoned for the highest density, CBD-3; no other area has as much CBD-3 zoned land. Look at the map pennster posted for reference. You could say Silver Spring sort of has two but the metro station area supersedes the other and county officials agree.
Silver Spring in a way already does resemble Manhattan (yes I’ve been there). The county decided long ago that Silver Spring would play the role as urban territory, it is far too late to be questioning whether Silver Spring is urban or deserves higher height and density, trying to argue that is mute at this point and trying to limit height is encouraging sprawl. This is largest CBD behind Baltimore after all.
As NY and even Rosslyn (which has far taller buildings existing and planned but is much smaller than Silver Spring) can attest to, having tall buildings doesn’t equal a diminishing quality of life or public space; it is the quality of the project that matters. In fact I would go as far to say that because you will not allow taller buildings you are loosing out on more public green space as the building foot prints WILL have to be larger in order to make up for the loss in height.
The Turf is adequate public green space IMO. We already have a 14 acre park that no body uses in South Silver Spring, it’s called Jessup Blair. This is after all an urban area and we need to be efficient with our finite land, which means maximizing density and height not being afraid of a smart growth idea. This is not a national park this is a highly-urbanized area.
Your text focuses to much on the buildings. To bus passengers, the most important aspect of theh project is the configuration of the bus loading/unloading area. Bus passengers ask questions like “will the bus access to Colesville Road be better or worse than it is now?” From what I’ve seen, the access to Colesville will be worse than it is now. The bus riders I talk to say the only way to make it better is to have a ramp over Wayne Ave. so the buses don’t have to play chicken with the cars stopped at the stoplight every time they want to get into the bus station. One drawing I saw over at the transportation store showed the buses having to exit onto Colesville Road. That would make things worse than they are now.
Where can I find the latest design of the transportation center?