Nathanael Hill

Urban Sprawl and the Environment

Individual Project

Florida Avenue Market: A Template for the New Urban Vernacular

Walk around the Florida Avenue Market on any weekend, and you will see a hive

of activity: t-shirt vendors selling off remnants from Obama’s inauguration; immigrant

families buying goat meat; hipsters lining up at A Litteri Italian market; cars jostling for

space with people outside DC Farmer’s Market. However, this reality presents a stark

contrast with the on-line commentary charting the history and proposed future of the

Market space (with some noble exceptions from the preservation crowd, including

Richard Laymon at “Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space”1). Developers have promoted

an alternate vision for the Market (see image 1), one that simultaneously denies the

authenticity of the Market and its continued vibrancy. The argument over the Market’s

future seems a microcosm for larger arguments over the future of DC: including the

proper role of space in an urban setting; multiple and perhaps differing aims of

development and revitalization; getting out in front of gentrification vs. promoting

gentrification; and perhaps most importantly, the search for the answer to who gets to

determine the character of an area.

A Brief History of Florida Avenue Market

Prior to the rise of Florida Avenue Market as a wholesale destination, the demand

for wholesale and fresh meats and produce for business and household alike was met by

DC’s Central Market, located at what is now the site of the National Archives. Following

the passage of the Public Buildings Act in 1926 mandating the development of the

Federal Triangle Area, the commissioners of the District of Columbia sought to relocate

the market to a single, conveniently located area. The commissioners settled on a parcel

in Southwest Washington, DC, accessible by both rail and water. Maryland farmers

bristled at this new location, banded together to form the Union Terminal Market

Association, and lobbied for a location in the Northeast quadrant. Exercising the

Association’s clout, together they purchased the land bounded by the railroad tracks on

the west, Florida Avenue NE on the south, 6th

Street NE on the east and Penn Street NE

1 http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/ and also http://capitalcitymarket.blogspot.com/

I am extremely grateful to Richard Layman, author of “Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space,”

urban/commercial district revitalization and transportation/mobility advocate and consultant, for his time,

insight and expertise in our entertaining discussions regarding the Florida Avenue Market, local politics

and gentrification.

on the north, a prime location based on its access to the rail yards to the west and the

commuter lines running out of Union Station. The remaining non-Association merchants

rushed to join the Association and participate in the new market, effectively killing the

Southwest market plan. As part of the negotiations surrounding their membership, they

extracted a pledge to develop an open-air farmer’s market adjacent to the wholesale

operations.

Construction began on the newly-named Union Market in 1929, and the Market

was opened in 1931. The Market continued to grow beyond its initial construction, and

soon boasted a selection of wholesale, meat and produce vendors. However, in 1962, a

public health report expressed concern for the open-air vending of meat and poultry, and

subsequent city legislation restricted the farmers market to the sale of fruits and

vegetables despite the dire warnings of Market merchants. By 1964, the farmers market

was largely moribund, and sold off, and by 1967 replaced with a new building. Despite

the downfall of the farmers market, the wholesale aspect of Union Market continued to

succeed, and the 1950s ushered in a new era of infill warehouse development. However,

this too would prove to be short-lived, as the rise of grocery store distribution centers

would deprive the wholesalers of important business. Individual merchants began an

exodus to the suburbs, and in the 1980s the government of the District of Columbia began

to buy several acres in the hopes of spurring revitalization. As more long-standing

merchants left the Market, the void began to be filled by a variety of ethnic markets.

Today, the Florida Avenue Market consists largely of “Koreans and Chinese and

Africans who specialize in catering to the new immigrant-owned restaurants and

groceries that have moved to the region”2 as well as remaining wholesale vendors. In

addition to the more tailored ethnic grocers, today’s incarnation of Florida Avenue

Market serves as a primary grocery option for residents of the food deserts that populate

the eastern edge of the District3 (food desert as defined by the USDA “a census tract must

have either: 1) a poverty rate of 20 percent or higher, OR 2) a median family income at or

below 80 percent of the area's median family income; to qualify as a “low-access

community,” at least 500 people and/or at least 33 percent of the census tract's population

must reside more than one mile from a supermarket or large grocery store”4). The

northern boundary of the Market has extended north from Penn Street NE to New York

Avenue NE (see image 2), and the most recent attempts to define/shape the future of the

market has fallen to a joint venture of J Street Development and Edens & Avant. This

venture has currently acquired approximately 140,000 square feet of space within the

Market, mostly centered on 6th

Street NE, and has designs for a project that “involves a

land assemblage for potential mixed use development, including retail, commercial,

residential and industrial uses.”5

Composition of Florida Avenue Market

2 Schwartzman, Paul. “Despite Challenges and Change, Market Is Still 'Another World': Faced With

Ebbing Crowds, Capital City Complex Takes on International Flavor.” The Washington Post. March 10,

2005 3 http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/fooddesert/fooddesert.html

4 http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/fooddesert/about.html#Defined

5 J Street Companies Capital City NE Development Project:

http://www.jstreetcompanies.com/capitalcitymarket

The Florida Avenue Small Market Plan6, commissioned by the District of

Columbia in 2009, provides the most comprehensive accounting of the composition of

the Florida Avenue Market area. Allowing for general economic-related turnover, at last

official count, the Market contained approximately 120 distinct lots, owned by

approximately 68 different entities. The largest of these current owners, including

Gallaudet University, Edens & Avant/J Street and Sang Oh & Company, in total, own

approximately 10% of the parcels, with the remaining parcels owned by individuals.

Many of the buildings on the premises are leased, and many of them are sub-divided

among multiple tenants. The buildings and lots in the market are primarily wholesale and

retail (including a diverse array of ethnic food markets, including Italian, African and

Asian venders), with the remainder divided up amongst parking, storage, office, and

restaurant space.

The physical structures themselves seem to arise from three distinct eras. The

first era of construction, overseen by the architect E.L. Bullock, provided a more classical

view, with 2 story warehouse spaces clearly defined by a loading dock bookended by

columns. The second era of construction largely mimicked the first, but was not guided

by the hand of a single architect. The third era of construction was highlighted by a joint

effort of the government of the District of Columbia and a collection of merchants to

construct a 200,000 square foot building, which would allow merchants to expand their

operations in lieu of relocating (see image 3).

Area Demographics

The Florida Avenue Market is bounded by several neighborhoods, a few of which

are undergoing demographic shifts. The Market is bordered by NoMA to the west, Near

Northeast to the south, Trinidad to the east and Ivy City to the north (see image 4).

Traditionally, Near Northeast, Trinidad and Ivy City have been middle-class residential

neighborhoods comprised of single-family and row house homes. Trinidad and Ivy City

belong to neighborhood cluster 23 (along with Arboretum and Carver Langston), and in

2010 the cluster had approximately 14, 500 residents,7 of whom 87% are African

American, and with an average family income of $45,000. NoMA and Near Northeast

are part of neighborhood cluster 25 (along with Union Station, Stanton Park and

Kingman Park), with a 2010 population of approximately 30,000 residents,8 of whom

43% are African American, and with an average family income of $126,000.

Of all the bordering neighborhoods, NoMA has experienced the most explosive

growth and development, largely following the development of the New York Avenue

Red-Line Metro stop. NoMA is “the fastest growing neighborhood in DC, with 16 new

shops and restaurants in just the last three years…(and) more than 1,200 residences

opened in 2010, and over 1,500 new apartments are currently under construction.”9

6 Florida Avenue Small Market Plan available through the DC Office of Planning:

http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Ward+6/Small+Area+Plans+&+Studie

s/Florida+Avenue+Market+Small+Area+Plan 7 NeighborhoodInfo DC, DC Neighborhood Cluster Profile, Cluster 23:

http://www.neighborhoodinfodc.org/nclusters/nbr_prof_clus23.html 8 NeighborhoodInfo DC, DC Neighborhood Cluster Profile, Cluster 25:

http://www.neighborhoodinfodc.org/nclusters/nbr_prof_clus25.html 9 NoMA BID Resident Snapshot: http://www.nomabid.org/the-neighborhood/residents/

Today, NoMA is roughly “50% built out or under construction with 16 million square

feet, 2 hotels, 2,700 residential units and 200,000 square feet of retail”10

including the

developments centered on 1st Street NE that consist of several office and apartment

buildings, as well as a Harris Teeter and other neighborhood amenities (this area will

only continue to overhaul, with the recent announcement of the decision to sell the parcel

of land currently housing the Greyhound Station, at 1st Street NE and L Street NE).

Similarly, Near Northeast along the southern border of the Market is experiencing a

demographic shift, as the continued development of the H Street NE Corridor (alternately

the Atlas District) continues to creep north.

External Influences

The Florida Avenue Market is defined as much by its history and current

composition as it is by surrounding geography. The Market’s northern boundary, New

York Avenue NE, is colloquially referred to as DC’s “Northern Gateway,” and provides a

crucial commuting artery from Maryland into the District, ensuring large amounts of

vehicular traffic. The current state of commercial development along this boundary

stretch of New York Avenue NE provides an array of fast food options, but very little in

the way of grocery and/or whole food options. Immediately to the east of the Market sits

Gallaudet University, a school of nearly 2,000 students providing services to the deaf

community (and a property owner within the Market itself). Gallaudet’s role as property

owner, boundary and population draw (especially one seeking to further connect the

campus to the city; see Gallaudet University’s “6th Street Corridor Development

Concepts” document) makes it a prime player in shaping the future of the Market.

Florida Avenue NE, the southern border of the Market, as in the case of New York

Avenue NE to the north, is a vital commuting corridor, providing access to Benning Road

NE and across the Anacostia River. To the south, the continued “rebirth” of the H Street

NE Corridor ushers in a younger, “hipster” dynamic, stereotypically urban “pioneers”

seeking the diversity the city has to offer and the demographic to whom various Market

plans have been aimed at. The rise of NoMA, with “a total development potential of

roughly 32 million square feet of mixed-use and transit-oriented development... that

translates to about 100 high density buildings,”11

spurs the population explosion along the

Market’s western border, both through the introduction of approximately 2,700

residential units and 2 hotels.

Transportation

The Market is accessible to vehicular traffic, with 4th

Street NE traversing the

length of the Market (southbound) from New York Avenue NE to Florida Avenue NE

and with 5th

Street NE running north from Florida Avenue NE to Penn Street NE and

providing access to the Brentwood Parkway. 6th

Street NE forms the border between the

Market’s eastern edge and Gallaudet University, and links to the east/west axes of Morse

Street NE, Neal Place NE and Penn Street NE. The Market boasts proximity to

alternative transportation options, with WMATA’s 90, 92, 93 and X3 bus lines running

10

NoMA BID Development Snapshot: http://www.nomabid.org/developmentleasing/ 11

NoMa BID Development Inventory: http://www.nomabid.org/developmentleasing/

along Florida Avenue; the D1, D3, D4 and D812

running east-west along L Street NE

(approximately 0.3 miles south of the Market); the New York Avenue Red-line Metro

stop located approximately 0.6 miles west of the Market; Greyhound, Bolt and Mega bus

terminals all within less than a mile radius of the Market; and both Amtrak and MARC

trains (and an additional Red Line Metro stop) at Union Station approximately 0.8 miles

away. Also, the Market is close to the Metropolitan Branch Trail, which offers a vital

bicycle link.

Gallaudet University13

Despite NoMA’s rise to prominence over the last several years (fueled mostly by

the opening of the New York Avenue Metro stop in 2004), the external influence that has

the potential to wield the most significant impact on the future of the Market and the

surrounding community is Gallaudet University. Gallaudet is keenly aware of its role in

the community, and recently has taken great efforts to include local stakeholders in the

evaluation of its 10 Year Plan (it is interesting to draw a comparison between the relative

lack of controversy regarding Gallaudet’s 10 Year Plan despite the potential threat of

gentrification it poses [especially as some of these neighborhoods deal with current

demographic shift] with the hostility surrounding Georgetown’s 10 Year Plan).

Gallaudet recognizes that as a private owner of property within the Market it is in

turn a steward of public character and the there is a responsibility to the larger

community inherent in owning property within this space. At the same time, the needs of

the University coincide (in some regards) with the needs of the surrounding communities.

In order to remain competitive, physical revitalization can play a key role in making

Gallaudet attractive to the next generation of students, both in terms of direct amenities

offered and through the successful integration of the University into the neighborhood (as

the campus has been historically isolated from the larger community). Successfully

integrating with and opening up to the surrounding communities can help overcome the

obstruction of economic development that Gallaudet represents between NoMA, the

Market and the H Street NE Corridor. Not only is Gallaudet looking to integrate with the

neighboring communities, but as the population begins to shift more is being asked of the

University, and the Market is an ideal space to begin to give back. Developing the edge

of campus abutting the Market (and the space owned within the Market) is something that

can be done for the greatest benefit of the campus and the community.

This development is not without risk to Gallaudet. As a distinct linguistic

community, it is imperative that deaf-design pervade the Market, allowing full use for the

student body and continuing the process of bridging the gown/town divide. Another risk

posed is the struggle between assimilation and identity. Finally, Gallaudet faces the

responsibility to improve the area, but to do so in a way that does not disperse or destroy

the urban fabric.

Current Events

Two current events stand out as having direct implications on the future of the

12

See WMATA Metrobus Route Map for Washington, DC: http://www.wmata.com/pdfs/bus/DC.pdf 13

I am indebted to Mr. Hansel Bauman, Director of Campus Design and Planning, Gallaudet University, for

his generosity of time and insight in our discussions regarding Gallaudet University, its relationship to the

Market and the surrounding neighborhoods and a host of other topics.

Florida Avenue Market: the ethics scandal of Ward 5 Councilmember Harry Thomas, Jr.

and the DC Farmers’ Market. On October 20, 2011, the DC Farmers’ Market (1309 5th

Street NE) was largely gutted by fire, displacing vendors and rendering the building

unusable.14

In no way minimizing the impact that the fire, and the resulting

displacement, has on individual vendors, there is, in fact, an opportunity presented by

fire, as the building was architecturally uninteresting, and is now primed for updating and

renovation. Councilmember Thomas’ existing ethics concerns has complicated efforts to

rally District government support for revitalization in particular,15

and renewed questions

of the government’s role in private development (already an issue with the Florida

Avenue Market following passage of the New Town plan).

All these external forces play an important role in shaping the Market area, and

are important in defining its relationship to the surrounding neighborhoods. The Market

is a crucial link between the burgeoning NoMA district, the H Street NE Corridor to the

south and the neighborhoods to the north and east, helping to push amenities and

opportunity eastward along Florida Avenue NE.

History of Florida Avenue Market Planning

The planning for Florida Avenue Market has undergone several incarnations, and

the most recent venture can, in a sense, be seen as the culmination of four previous efforts

to plan the Market’s future. The first effort, undertaken in 2006 by the DC Office of

Planning, “The Northeast Gateway Revitalization Strategy” identified the Florida Avenue

Market as one of four redevelopment opportunity areas. The Strategy recognized the

Market as both an under-utilized resource and a regional attraction, and saw the potential

for employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.16

This effort led almost directly into

the New Town development plan, a private effort spearheaded by Sang Oh & Company.

Mr. Sang Oh Choi, the owner of approximately 2 acres of Market land, with the support

of then Ward 5 Councilmember (and now At-Large Councilmember) Vincent Orange,

proposed a plan “which would convert the industrial area into a 24-acre complex of

condominiums, restaurants, a hotel and a much smaller warehouse sector.”17

After a

widely critiqued and seemingly closed process, the Council of the District of Columbia

enacted “The New Town at Capital City Market Revitalization Development and

Public/Private Partnership Emergency Act of 2006”18

(i.e. New Town Legislation). This

legislation created a public/private partnership with New Town Development, declared

the Market blighted, and sighting the belief that the Market was an economic and social

14

See: O’Connell, Jonathan. “Capital City Market recovers from a bad week.” The Washington Post,

11/21/2011

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-business/post/recovering-from-a-bad-week-at-capital-city-

market/2011/11/21/gIQAlk0miN_blog.html 15

Editorial Board Opinion. “More mischief from Harry Thomas.” The Washington Post, November 20,

2011. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/more-mischief-from-harry-

thomas/2011/11/18/gIQAWIb5fN_story.html 16

“The Northeast Gateway Revitalization Strategy” can be found on the DC Office of Planning website:

http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Ward+5/Small+Area+Plans+&+Studie

s/The+Northeast+Gateway+Revitalization+Strategy+and+Implementation+Plan+The+Northeast+Gateway 17

Silverman, Elissa. “New Town Market Proposal Approved,” The Washington Post, December 20, 2006

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121901403.html 18

http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/images/00001/20060721113809.pdf

liability for the District as a whole, authorized a planned community of housing

(including workforce housing), retail and other facilities as envisioned under a

comprehensive revitalization plan. New Town represented a classic approach to urban

renewal: the combination of modern architecture and accommodation of the automobile,

adopting principles used to guide suburban development.

Despite approval, the New Town plan received ample criticism, and the District

proceeded with the next planning stage. In 2007, the “North of Massachusetts Avenue

(NoMA) Vision Plan and Development Strategy” was released.19

Like the Gateway

document cited above, this Strategy identified the Florida Avenue Market as a

development destination, but began to focus in on a food theme, and also looked at the

development of the Market in a more comprehensive fashion, evaluating the potential for

housing and retail opportunities against those already proposed for the surrounding

wards. At the same time, and as part of its larger campus plan review, Gallaudet

University issued its “Gallaudet University 6th Street Corridor Development Concepts:

Gallaudet & Capital City Market Plan.”20

This plan recognized that the development of

properties owned by Gallaudet within the Market could provide the opportunity to foster,

grow and build the relationship between the university and the surrounding

neighborhoods, for the mutual benefit of all involved parties.

Finally, in 2009, the DC Office of Planning released the “Florida Avenue Market

Study Small Area Plan.”21

This plan sought to balance the needs of the surrounding

stakeholders, while ensuring the Market would be accessible to both current and future

users.

Small Area Plan

The Small Area Plan seeks to emulate successful mixed-use markets from other

cities (for example the Strip District in Pittsburgh, PA, or the Pike Place Market in

Seattle, WA). The Plan emphasizes the need to retain the essential character of the

industrial space while still facilitating the development necessary to allow the Market to

thrive into the future. The development would incorporate the character of the

surrounding areas, effectively bridging any gap between the Market and its external

stakeholders and communities. Aside from general cosmetic work to upgrade the

appearance of the Farmers Market, the development would include “restaurants and a

culinary institute to draw more daytime foot traffic to boost the businesses that are part of

the area.”22

In order to allow this additional foot traffic, a lot of the development would

be pedestrian-oriented.

19

“The NoMa Vision Plan and Development Strategy” can be found on the DC Office of Planning website:

http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Ward+6/Small+Area+Plans+&+Studie

s/NoMA+Vision+Plan+and+Development+Strategy 20

“Gallaudet University 6th Street Corridor Development Concepts: Gallaudet & Capital City Market

Plan” can be found on Gallaudet University’s website:

http://my.gallaudet.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/DailyDigest/employees/PR/Capital%20City%20Mkt%20Pr

esentation.pdf 21

“The Florida Avenue Market Small Area Plan” can be found on the DC Office of Planning website:

http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/In+Your+Neighborhood/Wards/Ward+5/Small+Area+Plans+&+Studie

s/Florida+Avenue+Market+Small+Area+Plan+Main+Page 22

Schwartzman, Paul. “City Study Urges Revitalization in Northeast Areas,” The Washington Post, March

3, 2005: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1499-2005Mar2.html

In all, the Small Area Plan relies upon simplicity and flexibility. The Plan allows

for creativity, diversity of use and benefit and for the adaptability to change according to

future Market demands. The Plan in its entirety is mixed-use, but it does segregate (to

some extent) according to purpose, proposing the wholesale elements be relocated to the

northern end of the Market to allow easy access to New York Avenue NE, and the

clustering of restaurant and retail among the remaining walkable streets. The Plan would

seek to preserve as much of the architecture and history of the Market as viable, but

zoning changes (currently, the Market is zoned for low-bulk commercial and light

industry, and new residential development is not allowed within the Market’s zoning

restrictions) would allow for some higher buildings to be incorporated into the Market.

Similar to the segregation-according-to-use approach, the Plan recommends a

segregation-according-to-density approach, where the highest-density buildings are

located in closer proximity to New York Avenue NE and the moderate-to-medium

density buildings are located in closer proximity to Florida Avenue NE and 6th

Street NE.

The Plan also focuses on increased connectivity, particularly to the New York

Avenue Red-Line Metro stop, as well as to the Metropolitan Branch Trail, both of which

would encourage pedestrian use. The Plan recommends the fostering of a sense of place,

primarily achieved through safe, enjoyable and usable open/public space (the Plan

elaborates on both these issues, offering a street-by-street detail on how to achieve

connectivity and improve open space).

In order to accommodate a diversity of uses, and to foster stakeholder buy-in, the

Plan suggests a series of steps aimed at ensuring public participation. For example, in

order to best include Gallaudet University, the Plan suggests that deaf design principles

be implemented in any final development plan.

The only effort to narrow down the scope from that which is broadly outlined in

the Small Area Plan has been the initial efforts undertaken by the J Street

Development/Edens & Avant joint venture. According to J Street, “to date, the Venture

has acquired approximately 140,000 square feet of property strategically located

throughout the larger site limits”23

with the understanding of the need to work in

conjunction with local stakeholders, and in negotiations with District government.24

Florida Avenue Market/Capital City Market/Union Market: What’s in a Name?

Throughout different phases of planning and use, the Market has been called by

different names. Currently, developers Edens & Avant propose returning to the original,

Union Market, which they see as a way to “to build on the culinary heritage associated

with the original Union Market, while also modernizing it as the area reestablishes itself

as a new foodie destination.”25

However, changing the name of a space is fraught with

implications and consequences. When new names are proposed for a place, two reasons

are often cited behind the need for this change: to create a sense of place or to facilitate

23

J Street Companies: http://www.jstreetcompanies.com/capitalcitymarket 24

To see Edens & Avant’s previous development work: http://www.edensandavant.com/development.asp 25

DePillis, Lydia. “Capital City/Florida Avenue No More: Developers Go With Throwback ‘Union

Market.’” Housing Complex Blog, Washington City Paper. August 18, 2011.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2011/08/18/capital-cityflorida-avenue-no-

more-developers-go-with-throwback-union-market/

an area’s reinvention. While both a sense of place and resident investment in the shaping

of space are important components to a healthy and vibrant community, ultimately the

quest to usher in a new identity disingenuously masks gentrification behind a thin veneer

of patronizing community improvement.

The main drawback of the sense of place argument for a re-branding campaign is

found in the assumption that there was, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein, no there there.

Efforts to brand/rebrand can instead erase the positive identity of a place. Proponents of

a name-change seek to create a cohesive sense of place, or hearken back to a gilded past,

but as the brand grows to overwhelm and erase identity, what, in fact, is lost is that very

sense of place sought. The commercial underpinnings of the branding campaign not only

erase the human element of the existing community and its web of connections, but it

also sets the agenda for the scope of the branding and how those inside and those forced

out of the branding are seen.

The reinvention justification begs the question of for whom is the space being

reinvented? For the benefit of the residents, who are concerned with the loss of identity,

pride and perhaps place as the Market is remade? Or for the businesses, who bemoan the

lack of foot traffic, and see a new name as a quick way to dispel any negative connotation

lingering in an old name? Part of the misguided drive behind re-branding comes from a

sense of competition between urban business districts and suburban box stores and

shopping malls, as though the needs of those communities are the same. Finally,

reinvention can be billed as the only recourse for a neighborhood whose name raises the

specter of crime and neglect, as the tool to drive development and empower residents (see

the “East of the River” vs. “River East” argument playing out in Anacostia). However,

instead of addressing the root cause of any problem a space may face the re-branding

glosses over the needs of the current residents and paves the way for others to come and

possibly take their place. The backlash against a re-branding campaign is another

incarnation of the backlash against the gentrification that follows in its wake.

A successful neighborhood marketing campaign does not need to include a

rebranding effort. Trumpeting the brand itself, what makes it unique, its positive history

and its unrealized potential are avenues to promoting a neighborhood’s return and the

foundation of a successful marketing campaign. Ultimately, as the battle for the soul of a

city’s spaces is waged, what is most important is reinvestment, not reinvention.

The (Re)Making of the Florida Avenue Market

The future of the Florida Avenue Market rests on a range of key concepts and

with a reevaluation of how we come to value and define success in terms of space.

Proposals such as New Town rely on a flawed rubric regarding space valuation and the

proper use of space, seeing economic indicators as the only yardsticks against which to

measure, seemingly divorcing the project from its larger context. In doing so, the New

Town proposal demonstrates an inability to evaluate diversity: of services, of places and

of people, and sees the Florida Avenue Market only for the potential of a clean-slate and

a sanitized view of urban living (complete with bowling alleys!), and crassly markets and

commercializes urban identity and cultural vitality, thereby leading to its marginalization

and displacement, and the unraveling of the urban texture of a place (or an identity), a

pattern reminiscent of the decline of East Village bohemia.26

Instead of utilizing space as

a mechanism to bridge cultural/generational/ethnic/ideological gaps, these “tabula rosa”

plans acts as a mechanism to facilitate diversity’s dispersal in a government-facilitated

asset sprawl, overwriting history, whitewashing the present and changing the future. This

diversity dispersion, mimics Merchant’s “colonial ecological revolution,” where

something native to a region (in her case plant or animal species, but in this case diversity

and the existing Market constituents and services) is extracted from its original context

and exported27

(in her discussion as overseas commodities, but in the Market case, the

diversity is exported to the suburbs). We must recognize, before it is too late, that there is

a cultural conscience to a built space, and that, in turn, there are cultural consequences in

its dissolution.

A successful definition of space conveys a clear political/ideological purpose,

stating unequivocally that the duty of the government and the role of market forces do not

have to be at cross-purposes. The power of the market, steered by the hand of

government, can be harnessed to preserve the cultural and architectural integrity of the

Market while ensuring that it has a viable future moving forward.

A place is not successful when divorced from its larger context, and any plan for

the Florida Avenue Market cannot be evaluated without recognizing its relationship to the

surrounding communities. Spaces are imbued with “…vitality and the quality of place

only when they are animated and modified by the qualities of a particular landscape.”28

The value of the Market is found in its use. The vitality and quality of place for the

Market is found in food, and it is essential that food continue to play a role in its future.

Edens & Avant has recognized this, and has named a “Director of Culinary Strategy”29

who has cited successful market projects in cities like San Francisco has the model for

the Florida Avenue Market.

Similarly, a place can only be successful if it “fits” practically and philosophically

within its surrounding neighborhood or region. This “fit” can be more broadly defined as

the quality of a place. Richard Florida defines the quality of a place as a combination of

three factors: what’s there (the built and natural environment), who’s there, and what’s

going on (a measure of the vibrancy of street life).30

The practical “fit” of a place, the

“what’s there,” speaks to the physical, environmental and architectural context, while the

philosophical “fit” of a place, the “who’s there,” (is it utilized by a diverse range of

people? by members of the surrounding community?) is more a measure of the

emotional context of a place; how the community at large and individual constituents

utilize and relate to a space. Finally, the “what’s going on” is the sum of the previous

two, as what is going on is determined by the interactions between an environment and its

users.

26

Jacoby, Russell. The Last Intellectuals: American Culture in the Age of Academe. Basic Books, 1987. 27

Merchant, Carolyn. Ecological Revolutions: Nature, Gender, and Science in New England. University

of North Carolina Press, 1989. 28

Kelbaugh, Douglas. Common Place: Toward Neighborhood and Regional Design. University of

Washington Press, 1997. 29

Sietsma, Tom. “Richard Brandenburg leaves ThinkFoodGroup.” The Washington Post, 07/21/2011.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/all-we-can-eat/post/richard-brandenburg-leaves-

thinkfoodgroup/2011/07/20/gIQA5elWQI_blog.html 30

Florida, Richard. The Rise Of The Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure,

Community And Everyday Life. Basic Books, 2002.

A successful space is also one that recognizes the role that it plays in the larger

community. Space becomes something around which a community crafts and reinforces

an identity, almost a rallying point (think of DC micro-neighborhoods that are defined by

their successful places such as Eastern Market or Barrack’s Row), and this in turn is often

manifested in larger battles over gentrification. “The role of place in our identity is also

evident in the growing struggles over who controls place.”31

Richard Florida goes on to

argue that place has become the preeminent concept around which we organize and

identify ourselves, replacing workplace as our defining characteristic (although in some

regards, place can seem to be a proxy for race or ethnicity, and in that regards could be

seen to further entrench segregatory patterns).

Finally, successful places are successful in that they act as incubators of diversity:

in terms of use, architecture and services. “Successful places do not provide just one

thing: rather they provide a range of quality of place options for different kinds of people

at different stages in the life course.”32

Florida Avenue Market as “Third Place”

Perhaps the most appropriate lens through which to evaluate the success of the

Florida Avenue Market is as a “third place.” The concept of the third place comes from

urban sociologist Ray Oldenburg, and it describes locations outside of the first place of

home and the second place of work that provide a neutral ground where people can

gather and interact, and that is necessary as a counter-balance to the increased

privatization of our daily lives.33

As a third place, the Florida Avenue Market succeeds in filling a broad range of

roles for the surrounding community. The first thing that the Market accomplishes is that

it helps to unify neighbors, establishing/continuing loose ties between diverse audiences

by acting as an informal community center. The Market becomes a mixing bowl in

which diverse neighbors can interact and experience sights and smells they might

otherwise not be familiar with (think of the range of ethnic grocers populating the

Market). Another manner in which the Market serves to unify neighbors is through

bridging the generational gap, bringing youth and adults into association with one

another, and helping to facilitate the transfer of traditions from one generation to the next.

Secondly, the Market serves as a "port of entry" for visitors and newcomers to the

neighborhood, becoming an anchor to the larger city for recent immigrants, and

introducing them to local history.

The Market also helps to care for the neighborhood and build community (both

physically and metaphysically). The Market accomplishes this by acting as an informal

news distribution and social event center and as a gathering place for neighbors. The

Market also contributes to the promotion and preservation of local history, serving as a

place of identity for the local community. The Market facilitates the building of the

physical community by promoting economic development, both as an institution that can

spur local revitalization as an anchor space (and one which guarantees high foot traffic),

31

Ibid. 32

Ibid. 33

Ray Oldenburg, “Our Vanishing Third Places.” Planning Commissioners Journal, Number 25. Winter

1996-1997.

and as a source for local business development opportunity.

The New Urban Vernacular

The New Urban Vernacular (NUV) serves as a lens through which to view the

cultural viability of any proposed project slated for the Florida Avenue Market space.

The NUV movement builds off of the framework proposed by New Urbanism, and

includes elements of the environmental justice movement, historical preservation, smart

growth and other revitalization efforts. Ultimately, NUV is a place-based and people-

focused approach to urban planning, looking to preserve positive externalities including a

diversity of use and character, for successful revitalization “…must begin, then, by

reinstating the balance among the widest range of local uses.”34

NUV practitioners

partner with local governments to incentivize the use of existing space and advocate for

infill development.

NUV endorses several of the propositions set forth by the Congress for the New

Urbanism in their charter, including the need for the built environment to be “…diverse

in use and population; … designed for the pedestrian and transit as well as the car;

…shaped by physically defined and universally accessible public spaces and community

institutions; (and) … framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local

history, climate, ecology, and building practice.”35

As the Market is an existing built

space, it already satisfies several of these principles, particularly in regards to its car and

transit accessibility. However, as development of the Market moves forward, it needs to

incorporate the remaining elements of the Charter: greater pedestrian accessibility framed

and facilitated by public space within the community institution of the Market; universal

accessibility to allow full use and enjoyment of the Market; and the preservation of the

architecture and design (and character) of the Market that celebrates its history and its

relationship to the surrounding communities.

Vernacular Code

With these broad guidelines in place, NUV then seeks to craft a comprehensive

code to guide the use of space. In order to formulate a specific and comprehensive code,

NUV begins with some aspects of the framework provided by Henry Wright in his “Six

Planks for a Housing Platform,” which posits the provision of ample, and properly

located community space, the minimization of the impact of cars on the use of space and

the planning of land, buildings and space in relation to one another. NUV then

supplements this approach with key pieces of the “Principles of Human-scaled

Communities,” including the need for a discernable center and the walk-ability of the

development. Finally, the NUV approach to development is augmented by some

principles found within the Hope VI program, namely the provision of services to the

community through partnerships with various agencies and service providers. These

elements combine to form a code which governs the appropriate development of space,

proscribing more radical deviations and prescribing the necessary elements to preserve

the Market’s character.

34

Duany, Andres and Plater-Zyberk, Elizabeth. Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of

the American Dream. North Point Press, 2001. 35

Congress for the New Urbanism. “Charter of the New Urbanism.” http://www.cnu.org/charter 2001.

Historical Preservation

Historic preservation serves as a safeguard, protecting the space from physical

and emotional demolition. More than preserving the built environment, historic

preservation acts as a mechanism to protect the character, history and diversity of an

area,36

and provides the starting point for any discussion regarding the Market’s future.

Within the Market area, the original warehouse buildings should be preserved as part of

any plan, serving as a reminder of the history of the Market, as well as providing some

measure of reassurance that neither the history nor the current residents who continue that

history will be erased. The act of preservation, the designation of a space as worthy of

protection, signals something to the surrounding community: that the District cares about

the area, that it is worthy of investment and that it will be a part of the future. “Historic

preservation can be the underlying basis of community renewal, human renewal and

economic renewal… preservation as a means to create an operating community of

concerned and reasonably happy people.”37

In addition, the preservation of the historic

structures and character of the Market can propel the development of the Market,

distinguishing the Market from surrounding developments and attracting business and

tourist alike.

Cultural Impact Statement

Adopting principles of the environmental justice movement, the Department of

Transportation outlined three principles through which to evaluate projects: “1) To avoid,

minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health and

environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority populations

and low-income populations. 2) To ensure the full and fair participation by all potentially

affected communities in the transportation decision-making process. 3) To prevent the

denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in, the receipt of benefits by minority and low-

income populations.”38

In addition to the need to recognize the environmental impact policy

implementation can have on minority and low-income communities, NUV understands

that there is also a cultural element that needs to be considered during the planning

process to avoid a disparate impact on any community. There is a clear connection

between built space/the structured environment and individual and community mental

“health.” Not only do people identify with (and find identity through) space, but a public

space can provide a sense of place and root a community into the larger context of the

surrounding city, and the treatment of a particular space within a community can act as a

larger signal to the role that community plays in the larger city (what does it say about

how a city values a particular community if its valued institutions are removed?). This

cultural justice perspective would seek to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse impact

on the surrounding community in which a project is situated, including damage to the

social fabric of a neighborhood, large-scale displacement or economic upheaval.

36

Email correspondence with Richard Layman 37

Moe, Richard and Wilkie, Carter. Changing Places: Rebuilding Community in the Age of Sprawl.

Henry Holt and Company, 1999. 38

U.S. Department of Transportation “An Overview of Transportation and Environmental Justice.”

Publication No. FHWA-EP-00-013, 2000.

Additionally, this perspective would ensure that those most impacted from the end results

of any action are full participants in the decision-making process that leads to them. Not

only would this affirm that every member of an impacted community is s stakeholder in

the project’s outcomes, but it would facilitate the transition of the individual from

stakeholder to place-maker. The cultural impact statement would assure that the

government, and any developer involved in the project, would give proper consideration

to the cultural environment and context prior to undertaking any major action that could

significantly alter the urban fabric.39

From Policy to Implementation

A plan that included these elements would reinforce and reinvigorate the Market as a

crucial third place. Any Market development that included robust public participation

would work to further unify neighbors, as the community more clearly could feel

invested in a place that helped build the future for. The development of the Market

would introduce some of the other characteristics for third places set forth by Ray

Oldenburg. As a venue for fresh and local produce, and in conjunction with agencies and

service providers (and the offering of public health and wellness and access to health-

related information/programs), the Market would help reduce the cost of living. In

addition to increasing access to healthy food (and perhaps providing nutrition expertise or

cooking classes)40

, the Market could accomplish this on a basic level by allowing support

systems to form naturally, as regular customers can be checked in on. In addition, the

Market could begin to act as a safe space for the community, furnishing abundant eyes on

the street, ensuring strangers safe use and enjoyment of the Market space. Finally, the

Market could begin to fill a vital role as an entertainment center, utilizing its physical

space as an entertainment venue, screening movies, hosting cooking events, pop-up

restaurants41

and allowing local craftsmen to exhibit their work.

Support and Opposition

Support for the Florida Avenue Market, as envisioned in the broadly defined

Small Area Plan, currently comes from a variety of the surrounding stakeholders. Both

Gallaudet University and NoMa BID see the development of the Market as a necessary

step in the integration of the area as a whole, as a vital conduit between diverse

neighboring communities. Public input was utilized during the planning process, but as

of right now plans are not concrete (and therefore any threat not immediate), that input

has been limited to those most apt to attend community meetings.

Opposition to any development of the Florida Avenue Market has seemingly

focused on several important issues: the need for (and previous lack of) community input;

the implications of redevelopment vs. revitalization (or in other words, ground-up

39

See: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 40

See: Layman, Richard. “Retail planning and the Florida Market.” Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space.

02/20/2009. http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2009/02/retail-planning-and-florida-market.html 41

See: Kelly. “Capital City Market to Get Pop-Up Restaurants?” DC Mud: The Urban Real Estate Digest

of Washington, DC. 08/02/2011. http://dcmud.blogspot.com/2011/07/capital-city-market-to-get-pop-

up.html

revitalization vs. top-down renewal); the development of new spaces without the

strengthening of existing spaces; and sort of lording over them all, the fear of

gentrification and displacement.

Opposition centers primarily on the fear of the loss of essential character of the

Market. To paraphrase Christopher Lasch, the danger to public spaces comes from “…

the erosion of its psychological, cultural and spiritual foundations from within.”42

The

fear was more than just the loss of wholesalers, t-shirt vendors and ethnic markets, it was

a fear of a loss of a way of life (it is important to note the large role that food plays in our

daily lives: not only giving sustenance, but transmitting tradition down through the

generations, inspiring ritual observance and fueling cultural and ethnic identity, so

perhaps fear of the loss of ethnic markets and the Market’s food theme isn’t such a small

fear in and of itself), and fear of a loss of a part of DC itself, of an architectural and

cultural heritage.

A lot of the opposition directed at the initial New Town plan centered on the lack

of community input, and the resulting loss of character that the development portrayed.

The New Town plan spelled the end of the Market as it had existed, and “to destroy it is

to destroy authenticity, and replace it with some sort of modern suburban-like New Town

subdivision, rather than respect and extend the urbanity that makes Washington DC an

attractive place to live today.”43

The inclusion of seemingly suburban features into an

urban environment (such as box stores) and without public input, was intuited by

surrounding communities as the first stages of removal. The New Town plan calling for

housing on a scale not seen in the surrounding neighborhoods reinforced the fear the

Market was not being revitalized, but being redeveloped.

In addition to the general opposition to specific development plans for the Market,

there exist structural obstacles to its development (particularly its development in line

with the NUV paradigm). These obstacles include local regulations and zoning; the

balancing of multiple private owners and the impact multiple ownership has on building a

cohesive vision for the Market; general economic conditions and the availability of funds

and subsidies to encourage smart growth; overall project costs associated with infill

development; and the ever-present need for community involvement and how that

involvement may change as the community changes.

Conclusion

Over the course of the last several years, the future of the Florida Avenue Market,

and who that future is meant to serve, has been hotly debated. Despite its continued use,

different visions have alternately been promoted an alternate vision for the Market, some

of which envisioned a clean break from its past, and some of which sought to embrace

this past. The argument over the Market’s future seems a microcosm for larger

arguments over the future of DC and of cities in general: including the proper role of

space in an urban setting; multiple and perhaps differing aims of development and

revitalization; getting out in front of gentrification vs. promoting gentrification; and

perhaps most importantly, the search for the answer to who gets to determine the

character of an area. While the exact future of the Market seems unclear as the

42

Lasch, Christopher. The Idea of Progress: The Purpose of Place and the Meaning of Values. 43

“Testimony on the Florida Market New Towns proposal,” Richard Layman, Friday, October 20, 2006

surrounding communities wait for the next plan to be issued, the argument over for who

the plan will be for continues on. The hope with this paper was to try and address some of

these questions, and to present a framework for thinking about the future of the Market in

a way that would demonstrate how the relationship between a community and space is

symbiotic, and that as one goes, so goes the other. The character of an area is formed by

the interaction of individuals with the built and natural environment, and this character is

constantly reborn, as new individuals discover its particularities and learn to identify with

its opportunities.

It is important to recognize that the battle over the future of the Market is a battle

over the future of the District itself, and an attempt, on a local level, to present a case for

how cities in general ought to work and be valued. Cities survive through the

preservation of diversity: of people and of places, and as a city loses its vital spaces it

loses its character. “City character is blurred until every place becomes more like every

other place, all adding up to no place.”44

The value of cities is found in their promotion

of diversity, in their ability to make space for a plethora of needs and opportunities. As

Jane Jacobs said, “the point of cities is multiplicity of choice.”45

As redevelopment

schemes continue to gloss over the rich cultural history of our public spaces, cities lose

their vibrancy, their identity and their value.

44

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Modern Books, 1961. 45

Ibid.

Supplemental Images

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4