The Washington Peace Letter is published monthly for the social justice community of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. It's purpose is to support local, national and international struggles against oppression. It seeks to present a radical analysis of current events, covering information not readily available in the corporate media.

The Peace Letter welcomes submissions of calendar announcements, articles, letters to the Editor , and artwork from the progressive community. Articles may be from 300-1200 words, but may be edited for space considerations. Preference is given to materials that cover actions or organizing campaigns in the D.C, metropolitan area.

We reserve the right to select or reject any submission.

Except as noted, Peace Letter items are copyright free and may be reproduced. Please give credit and send us a copy if you do use something.

In the early part of this century, the neighborhoods of what is now called Shaw were active and alive, but by the 1960s began to hit hard times. Urban flight, racism and civic and governmental divestiture contributed to the problem. Unfortunately, those were nothing compared to what came next: urban renewal. Urban renewal was an ill-conceived plan to bring economic growth to our declining cities by demolishing pre-existing structures—homes, businesses, schools—to clear land for new construction. To city planners, salvation resides in new development because to them, new development equals new growth and economic vitality.

Thirty acres of city life in Shaw were destroyed. Thirty acres of our nation’s oldest and most vibrant Africa-American community were lost forever. Urban renewal’s promises weren’t kept—they couldn’t be. Having destroyed neighborhoods, grocery stores and schools, city planners removed exactly what developers need to execute a viable venture: whole communities. The developers didn’t come and neither did new growth, nor did economic prosperity for those who stayed in Shaw all these years. But that is past us now.

It is past us in the sense that planners don’t call it urban renewal any longer, that is. Today they call it a new sporting arena, a new convention center or a new baseball stadium, and now, a new intermodal transportation center. Planners often assume that discussing “one project” won’t cause a big stir in the communities that endured urban renewal. Community members, however, know that planners never only have “one project” for a neighborhood, and it is the confluence of several large and overbearing projects that contributes to the demise of our downtowns and systematically kills off our communities.

One of these overbearing projects—one of the latest in a string of attacks on Shaw—is the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC). It was not a surprise to residents when it was proposed, mind you, it was expected. When the plans for the new convention center flew through committee, the community and the City Council, it proposed to take away 1,000 parking spaces around it. Residents, already frustrated by the present traffic and parking situation in their neighborhoods, knew that toll would be too great, and figured that an 800,000 square foot building would not be built for the sake of tourism without adequate parking. The Intermodal Transportation Center would remedy that—but at great cost, once again to the communities of Shaw.

The proposed ITC would include 7,200 parking spaces, and a truck and tour bus marshaling yard. In all, 17 more acres of Shaw will be lost to the combination of poor planning and the mighty automobile. That is 17 acres of existing homes, offices, open space, and a 330-unit senior citizen’s residence; not 17 acres of urban renewal land. Another poorly planned venture for the same neighborhood, the new baseball stadium, would remove an additional 3,000 units of housing.

The community will be losing so much more than housing and historic context through these plans. Currently, anyone who lives or shops in D.C. is being taxed an additional 7% on food and beverages bought at bars and restaurants to pay for the new convention center. So are our visiting friends and families when rooms are rented during visits. The city knows it can’t afford to pay for convention tourism without our money. They pretend to impose these taxes on the industry which profits from these types of ventures—the hospitality industry—but the industry simply passes it on to the consumers. Low and moderate income folks can’t afford to pay for the luxury of a new convention center we might never use. But that is only half of the price we will be paying this time.

As a thank you to the city for the ITC, we will also be paying slowly with our lives. The ITC will help all of the other large-scale development projects in Shaw bring in thousands of additional cars, trucks, and tour buses down residential and commercial streets. This increased traffic will create a heavy burden on city streets and make them even more unnavigable by pedestrians and bicycles. It will undoubtedly add to the city’s already failing grade in ground-level ozone, according to the Environmental Protection Agency quality standards. Ground-level ozone is caused by large quantities of vehicle exhaust being trapped in the air. These toxins have been linked to lung disease, asthma, and cancer, to name a few. By promoting such development in an area comprised of low and moderate income individuals—who most often, do not have adequate healthcare—the city is participating in the slow but sure murder of its citizens.

The only development that Shaw needs today, is the same that it needed before urban renewal came to town. We need for the city to invest in making our community whole again. We need more housing and green spaces. We need safer parks, schools, and streets. We need a place in our community to care for those in our families who are elderly or in need. In sum, a wholistic approach that will bring Shaw back to its heyday.

The ITC and other proposed plans for Shaw can still happen in other parts of D.C. if that is really what the city needs to increase its revenue stream. There are other neighborhoods where the negative impact would not be a deadly one, and the potentially positive economic impact would be a welcome one. The ITC could be placed in the commercial warehouse district behind Union Station, away from homes, but close to Metro. RFK Stadium could be restored without devastating the vibrant neighborhood surrounding it and updated to accommodate a new home-team. Creative solutions should be discussed through which older buildings can be saved and neighborhoods preserved, and which allow new ideas to take root and whole communities to grow. Economic growth in D.C. does not need to happen at the expense and health of one of its most diverse communities.

Information for this article came from the report “Choking to Death: Thousands of Cars, Trucks and Buses Threaten Human Health and In-town Neighborhoods Under D.C. Government Proposal.” To obtain a copy of the report, call Beth Solomon of the Shaw Coalition at (202) 789-7864.

Polly Aris Stamatopoulos lives in Shaw. She is with Project Change and a board member of the Washington Peace Center.

Back to Top