Mount Vernon Triangle Census Population

With the ANC redistricting discussions well underway several tools have been published depicting visual representations of Ward 6 population. Using the tool it appears Mount Vernon Triangle has a census population of 2840.

The block that contains Museum Square and the City Vista L, K and V contains more than half of MVT’s population. Unfortunately the Equity Residential Apartments at 401 & 425 Mass lacked residents during the period the census was enumerated.

The ANC redistricting process aims to create single member districts between 1900 and 2100 residents. The census population drives the metrics and future population growth that has already been achieved (425 Mass) or projected growth (in-progress construction at 425 L) is considered irrelevant.

Be the first to like.
SociBook Digg Facebook Google Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon


  1. 1

    Si Kailian says

    The discussions & polls under way at are really interesting. I’m curious, how do Triangle residents feel about having NOMA with their ANC vs Near NE/Hst/Atlas… ? Or what about half & half?

  2. 2

    dan maceda says

    NOMA makes sense to me . There is significant development planned and underway and there is undeveloped property nto be planned and developed. The ANC has or can have real influence of what gets developed

  3. 3

    FourthandEye says

    >> “The ANC has or can have real influence of what gets developed (in NoMA)”

    Some ANC will. But should it be the “Shaw ANC”?

    Mount Vernon Triangle at this point has to be in the Shaw ANC. We have no other option. But NoMA could be in a different ANC. I’d argue it probably should be in whatever ANC the rowhouses on the east side (aka Near Northeast) of the train tracks are in. They are the biggest patrons of NoMA’s metro station, grocery, restaurants, etc… People Shaw/MVSQ/MVT may shop at Harris Teeter every now and again but on a day to day basis we most often use the amenities of PQ & Chinatown rather than NoMA.

    It’s unfortunate that the Ward boundaries separate MVT from PQ/Chinatown. However that ship has already sailed.

  4. 4

    dan maceda says
    Don’t see anything in the rules that mandates we be part of Shaw. Not only that but the rules say ANCs should not overlap wards but does permit an exception for neighborhood cohesiveness so in fact I think one could argue that both sides of Mass ave should be in one ANC since they do make up part of a residential neighborhood. I’m not suggesting that we make that argument but I question on what basis City Vista has to be in Shaw

  5. 5

    FourthandEye says

    MVT is linked with Shaw now because the way they drew the Ward boundaries Shaw can barely be connected with any other part of Ward 6 without going through us. That’s more geometrically speaking than any politico rules…

  6. 6

    dan maceda says

    not true I see a map that has Shaw connecting to NOMA with what would be 5 smds
    and City Vista not included

  7. 7

    Si Kailian says

    Theoretically, Shaw could be a 3 person ANC. One of the goals of the Commission is to try to make rather substantial sized Commissions of 7-9 SMDs so it doesnt become super hyperlocal. The current chair of ANC 2C has thrown out the idea of having a 5 person ANC which has met with some debate. In that scenario Shaw, MVSQ, & the Triangle only to the west of 395 would be included. IMHO I think thats too small and concentrates too much influence with the upper end, plus splitting the Triangle is not desirable. I prefer it to be spread out and as diverse as possible. (And can we please get them to stop calling it the “Shaw” ANC?! Shaw technically stops at M Street) Anyway NOMA can go either way mathematically and there is the impending air rights development over the train tracks to consider. Who gets to help shape that? Should it be only the ANC to the east? Or both the east & west? As Walmart comes in, how is that going to affect the foot traffic between sub neighborhoods? Do people over in the Triangle ever go hang out over in NOMA? I know some in the chimney do…;) Things to think about and worthy of good discussion. I will say that having the community in one ward, and now likely in one ANC is going to be awesome. from MVSNA we have been dealing with the split and it is tons of work and the amount of meetings gets overwhelming. So I would not be in favor of a cross border ANC.

  8. 8

    Tony says


    I agree with a lot of what you say, and I’m sure you’re looking forward to having half the number of meetings!

    However, I disagree with this statement:
    “Anyway NOMA can go either way mathematically”

    The problem with this is that NoMa doesn’t end at the tracks. It’s bisected by the tracks, and there are residents and businesses on both sides. On the East side, it’s thoroughly blended into Near Northeast (with thousands of residents), and they can’t be easily separated. As of the census, the population was zero in most of NoMa, but there are now over 1,000 people there who shouldn’t be (and don’t have to be) split.

  9. 11

    Tony says

    It’s definitely a funky shape, but the core of the neighborhood is along First Street NE. Here’s the boundary map:

    The area between Eye, New Jersey, and Mass in Northwest is actually part of NoMa (Walmart and Gales School). The Northern tip is in Ward 5, but there’s probably nothing we can do about that. As of now, there’s been almost no development on the Ward 5 side, although a big apartment complex is under construction across from XM.

    The section in NW is 100% office except for the planned apartments above the Walmart (which is closer to MV Triangle than anywhere else). The rest of NoMa is all planned or existing as mixed-use blocks..

  10. 12

    FourthandEye says

    The W6 Task Force does not need to conform to BID boundaries. At the moment I support Tony’s plea to keep the commercial hub of NoMA with the Near Northeast residential populace. However I think it’s horse manure to say the Walmart site, which is in NW, needs to go to the NoMA/H Street ANC simply because it’s in the NoMA BID.

    While I don’t think the redistricting should bisect any BID in half it’s ridiculous to expect every single parcel at the peripheral outskirts of a massive and irregularly shaped BID to remain in the same ANC as the core.

  11. 13

    Tony says

    I agree that it would make sense for the NW portion of NoMa to be with MV Triangle. As I said, it’s outside the core of NoMa, and it’s primarily office.

  12. 14

    Tony says

    But even more importantly, it should be with whatever ANC has NW One and adjacent developments between North Cap and New Jersey.

  13. 15

    Tony says

    (I imagine the area between New Jersey and North Cap would be with Shaw and MV Triangle, but I know it could also go either way.)