Living
Helping transform city’s living landscape
Developer, Universal Gear owner Franco puts his passions to work
David Franco (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Last week was the anniversary of the 1968 riots in D.C., following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in Memphis. The ensuing five days of destruction that befell Washington and filled the sky with smoke scarred the city’s landscape for decades and cut a hole in the heart of commerce through the prominent local retail districts of the era.
Washington neighborhoods hollowed out by looting and fires are only now beginning to fully finish recovering as commercial and residential real estate development repurposes the remaining empty buildings and reconstructs many of the last vacant lots across a wide swath of the city. Nowhere has this transformation been more dramatic than along the 14th Street, N.W., commercial corridor, as it intersects with U Street and stretches northward into Columbia Heights.
It is in this area that long-time community entrepreneur and local businessman and real estate developer David Franco continues to have a significant impact on a still rapidly evolving landscape. Uppermost in his mind has been this guiding principle: “How can I impact the community by creating a positive environment and contribute effective change in a concentrated area?”
A Washington-area native and lifelong resident, Franco recalls his father vividly detailing the riots of 44 years ago. Now 47, he remembers the pride and gratitude in the recounting of customers driving to the family-owned clothing store in downtown Washington at 12th and G streets, now a Macy’s department store in the former Hecht’s building, to stand in front waving on potential looters. Appreciative of the years of dedicated customer service conveyed to generations of families, “not this place” they implored in defending the business. The store remained untouched throughout the extended melee of anger and frustration.
Franco grew up understanding firsthand the importance of providing attentive and personalized customer service and engendering this type of loyalty. He would later infuse his own business activities with building relationships in the marketplace. A strong sense of ethics, a spirit of community-mindedness and dedication to the client experience and product provided were to become the trademarks of his future endeavors.
Following a three-year stint at the University of Maryland where he studied architecture, business and urban affairs, Franco continued working with the family enterprise, a successful local chain of discount department stores, until 1989. It was then that he became one of the investors backing the management team at the iconic nightclub Tracks that would dominate the gay dance scene through the next decade. He also partnered with the group in opening Trumpets restaurant and lounge on the 17th Street dining and entertainment strip near Dupont Circle.
Soon after, during the April 1993 weekend of the national March on Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bi Equal Rights and Liberation, Franco would launch a clothing and accessories store with then business partner and commercial interior designer Keith Clark.
Universal Gear, located above Trumpets in a street level retail space at the corner of 17th and Q streets, quickly skyrocketed in popularity, outfitting many a gay man casually attired for work, play or the gym. The store would soon expand into a second level, nearly doubling in size with a complete interior renovation and striking new layout.
Franco would later explore market opportunities with since discontinued stores in Atlanta and Chicago’s Boystown, as well as opening a thriving Manhattan store in the heart of Chelsea and another in Rehoboth Beach. Universal Gear is adding a second New York location early next month in the trendy Hell’s Kitchen midtown west neighborhood at 9th Avenue and 49th Street.
In tandem with his development activities in the 14th and U area and following his customer base eastward, the local Universal Gear relocated to 14th and P streets in November 2007, becoming an expansive new neighborhood retail anchor.
David Franco (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Franco had earlier discovered that his passion for architecture and urban planning would lead him to residential real estate development, first renovating and marketing a 12-unit condo building on Chapin Street in Columbia Heights with business partner Jeff Blum, with whom he co-founded Level 2 Development. Excited by the then-booming pre-recession housing market, they started looking around for additional opportunities and set their sights on developing a larger project.
A Scorpio, Franco admits to “loving a challenge.”
This led Franco and Blum to undertake one of the largest and most prominent residential development projects along 14th Street.
Located at Florida Avenue and standing as the gateway at the sloping incline into adjoining Columbia Heights, the massive View 14 building and its 185 rental units and 30,000 sq. ft. of ground floor retail space – replacing an auto repair garage and an unattractive array of satellite dishes and communication towers – became a harbinger and symbol of extensive change in the area. David calls one of the penthouse units with a south-facing pinnacle terrace overlooking the area home.
Construction cranes are once again jutting into the sky along the high-density thoroughfare. The outline of a large glass-clad apartment building across the street from View 14, originally designed by Level 2 and subsequently sold to another firm for construction following initial planning, is quickly progressing toward completion.
Level 2 Development will next begin construction of a 144-unit studio and one-bedroom apartment project on 14th Street at Wallach Place, only steps south of U Street. Groundbreaking for the yet to be named project, located at 1919 14th St., will signal the Level 2 duo’s next project in the District, undertaken in association with Keener-Squire Properties.
The long road to project approval was not an easy one, according to Franco. He compares the process to the infamously cumbersome regulatory obstacles experienced by restaurant and bar owners under the city’s liquor licensing regimen.
Acknowledging that some neighborhood residents are often skeptical regardless of the track record of a local business, he notes that an “overabundant sense of empowerment” by small numbers of frequently ill-informed neighborhood opponents of change and small citizens groups requires advance calculation of the substantial expense for both hard and soft costs related to project delays and extensive round-robin negotiations. This results in higher rental or sale prices and can endanger project viability.
Underscoring how challenging a place the District can be to conduct business, Franco longs for local entrepreneurs to be respected as shared stakeholders. He points out that better cooperation would yield greater benefits for all.
Franco does not hesitate to confirm that a new ethos has taken hold for housing construction and resident lifestyles in the most vibrant and developing areas of the city. “We’re betting the ranch on it,” he offers, describing a distinct consumer preference for smaller home environs with modern finishes and amenities designed for a diverse demography drawn to a life largely experienced outside the front door.
“That’s how we live now,” he adds, identifying retail stores and shops of all types, dining and entertainment destinations and social watering holes as current interactive magnets and contemporary gathering places. Franco points out that demand for such community spots will likely continue to outpace capacity as the area – already experiencing the city’s greatest growth and a dramatic recent double-digit percentage population increase – adds more than 3,000 new residents in the next year.
David Franco (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Despite the business hurdles and regulatory obstacles, Franco remains committed to pursuing additional projects and public/private partnerships with and in the city he loves and lives. Enlivened by the development process and passionate about the results is what continues to motivate and inspire his efforts to play an ongoing role in the creation of a livable and engaging urban environment.
Mark Lee is a local small business manager and long-time community business advocate. Reach him at [email protected].
Michael,
I’m 34, and after being on the dating scene for about 12 years, I’m coming to the conclusion that I don’t want to be in a relationship.
I don’t love hanging out with the same person over and over again. I don’t feel all gooey when I’ve been with someone for a while. I run out of things to say, and also, it just gets boring.
I like my space. I don’t like having to share the bathroom or have someone next to me all night, especially when they want to go to sleep holding me. I know that sounds like heaven to a lot of people but it just feels intrusive to me.
It’s a pain to have to compromise what I want to do. When I want to go someplace on vacation, or try a restaurant, or get up early to go to the gym, or sleep in, I don’t want to have to run that by someone else and get their OK. Life’s short. I want to do what I want to do.
I feel like we are constantly bombarded with the message to date and find a mate, but I don’t really see the point. I don’t think I’m an introvert—I have a lot of friends—but I also like to spend time by myself and not be accountable to anyone.
When I think about marriage, it seems like a very old-fashioned concept, developed for straight people who want to have children. Historically you needed one person to work and another one to stay home and raise the kids. And you needed to stay together to give your kids two parents and a stable home. I get that.
But if I’m not having kids, what’s the point? I don’t need a husband to have sex. I can and do hook up all the time. It’s so easy to find someone online. And I get to have a lot more variety when I’m single than when I’m dating. Even though my relationships are always open, when I am dating someone, I always hook up a lot less, because I have to worry about the boyfriend’s feelings being hurt if I hook up “too much.”
I know I sound unromantic and maybe selfish but this is how I see it.
My friends are all about having a boyfriend. They think I’m being ridiculous. Can I get another opinion?
Michael replies:
You make great points. Relationships do require us to give up some of our independence. They can feel stifling at times. And when the excitement of a new partner fades, things will at times feel “boring” in all sorts of ways, including sex. You can choose to avoid all of this by remaining single.
But relationships also give us tremendous overlapping opportunities to grow, including:
Being pushed to develop a clear sense of self: When we must constantly decide what we are willing to do or not do as part of a couple; and when our partner inevitably and frequently has interests, values, and priorities that conflict with ours, then we are challenged, over and over, to decide what is most important to us and how we want to live our lives.
Frequent opportunities to build resilience: All those old issues from our past that get us upset or riled up? We have to work through them so that we can stay (pretty) calm rather than losing our minds when our buttons are pressed.
Improving our ability to have hard conversations – and without rancor: Unless we’re able to disagree, speak up, or confront when it’s important to do so, we are going to twist ourselves into a pretzel striving to accommodate the other person. And being able to engage in tough talks in a loving way is necessary if we want to have a loving relationship.
Becoming a more generous person: You wrote that you like to have things your way. But part of life, whether or not we are partnered, involves being thoughtful, considerate, and willing to put someone else first at times. Great relationships require us to do all of these things regularly—and many of us find that contributing to the happiness of someone we care about can increase our own happiness.
Besides these ongoing challenges, relationships give us the experience of someone knowing us deeply, and knowing someone deeply. There can be great comfort in going through life with someone with whom we have this intimate connection, along with ongoing shared experiences of trust, support, comfort, and love. Long-term companionship is also an adventure: Can we keep the relationship vibrant and fun as we both keep changing over time?
If you choose to remain single: Many people play their friendships on the easy setting, keeping things pleasant, on-the-surface, and non-confrontational; and cutting people off when things aren’t going well. Hanging in there to deal with the rough stuff can lead to deeper, longer friendships, and plenty of personal growth.
I do have a question for you: I am curious what sort of relationships you saw growing up, and what your own relationship experiences have been.
Intimate relationships aren’t for everyone, and you get to decide what is right for you. But if your negative view of relationships is influenced by having witnessed or experienced intrusive or just plain awful relationships, maybe you want to do some work (therapy, for example) to heal from this stuff, rather than letting your past limit your future. A healthy relationship means being part of a couple while also remaining a vibrant individual, not being stifled, bored, and losing your independence.
(Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, and New York. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].)
Autos
Wagons ho! High-class, head-turning haulers
Automakers still offer a few good traditional station wagons
As a teenager, one of the first cars I drove — and fell in love with — was our family’s hulking full-size wagon. It stretched over 19 feet in length and weighed a whopping 5,300 pounds. That’s three feet longer and 1,000 heavier than, say, a Ford Explorer today.
But this Leviathan felt safe and practical, especially when tootling around town with my crew or traveling solo cross-country. Of course, this hauler was also an eco-disaster.
Luckily, that’s not the case today. And even though the number of traditional station wagons keeps shrinking, automakers are still offering a few gems.
VOLVO V60 CROSS COUNTRY
$54,000
MPG: 23 city/31 highway
0 to 60 mph: 6.6 seconds
Cargo space: 51 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Elegant design. Composed handling. Top safety features.
CONS: So-so power. Modest rear legroom. Only two trim levels.
The 2026 Volvo V60 Cross Country doesn’t cry for attention — and that’s the point. This is the automotive equivalent of Kristen Stewart, a celebrity who’s confident in her own skin and sees no need to post about it.
Under the hood, there’s a four-cylinder turbo engine paired with a mild-hybrid system, producing 247 horsepower. You won’t outrun other drivers, but there is a sense of calm authority when accelerating. The standard all-wheel drive and 8.1 inches of ground clearance mean this wagon is ready for dirt roads, bad weather or a spontaneous weekend jaunt.
And inside? Scandinavian minimalism at its finest. Clean lines. Gorgeous materials. Google-based infotainment that mostly works — though occasionally the system could be a bit faster, at least for my taste. The ride is smooth, composed and quiet, even if acceleration feels more “measured sip” than “espresso shot.”
But here’s the twist: After more than a decade, this is the final Volvo wagon in the U.S. Its farewell tour ends in 2026. That alone gives it collector-car status.
MERCEDES-AMG E53 WAGON
$95,000
MPG: 21 city/25 highway
0 to 60 mph: 3.4 seconds
Cargo space: 64.6 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Supercar vibe. Hybrid versatility. Stunning interior.
CONS: Some fussy controls. Can feel heavy when cornering.
If the Volvo V60 Cross Country is subtle, the 2026 Mercedes-AMG E53 Wagon is a screamer. It’s like being at a Lil Nas X concert: flashy, high energy, and full of shock and awe.
This performance wagon — a plug-in hybrid, no less — pushes well over 500 horsepower (and in some configurations over 600 horsepower), launching from 0 to 60 mph as fast as a $300,000 Aston Martin supercar.
Yes, deep down, this is still a wagon. But you also can do a Costco run in something that could embarrass sports cars at a stoplight. That duality is delicious.
Inside, Mercedes leans all the way in. The high-tech Superscreen setup stretches across the dash. Ambient lighting glows like a curated art installation. The 4D surround-sound audio literally pulses through the seats. It’s immersive. Borderline excessive. And entirely the point.
Rear-axle steering helps mask the size of this car, but there’s no hiding the weight — it’s a big, powerful machine. Still, this hauler handles far better than physics suggests it should.
PORSCHE TAYCAN CROSS TURISMO
$121,000
Range: 265 miles
0 to 60 mph: 2.8 seconds
Cargo space: 41 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Lightning fast. Space-age design. EV smoothness.
CONS: Very pricey. Options add up quickly. Limited rear visibility.
The Porsche Taycan Cross Turismo completely rewrites the wagon formula. Fully electric. Shockingly fast. Designed like it belongs in the Louvre.
Performance is instant. Depending on trim level, you’re looking at 0-to-60 mph in less than 3 seconds. No exuberant engine noise — just that smooth, purring EV surge.
Handling? Pure Porsche. Low center of gravity thanks to the battery-pack placement. Precision that makes winding roads feel like choreography. And then — hello — there’s also a Gravel Mode for light off-road use.
Inside, the style is restrained but high-tech. Digital displays dominate, including a 10.3-inch passenger side touchscreen. Yet the layout feels intentional rather than overwhelming. Build quality is exceptional. Options, including leather-free materials and an active-leveling system for hard cornering, are endless — and expensive.
Range varies by model. But as with any EV, your lifestyle (and charging access) matters.
Overall, this is a wagon that looks and behaves like one helluva class act.
Advice
My family voted for Trump and I cut off contact
Now my father is ill and I don’t know what to do
Dear Michael,
I stopped talking to my family last year because they all voted for Trump. It’s not like they didn’t know whom they were voting for — they’d already had four years of seeing him in action.
I decided that I couldn’t remain in contact with people whom I felt wanted to take away my rights as a gay man. That is what they essentially did by voting for Trump.
They had come to my wedding in 2012, they had welcomed my husband and me into their homes for the holidays for our entire relationship, so I couldn’t believe how little they actually cared about me and my community. I was profoundly hurt.
They’ve reached out but I have been too angry at their hypocrisy to engage in more than a perfunctory way. I miss them, sure, but as I’ve watched our community be attacked, I just get so angry that I don’t want to talk. I certainly don’t want to hear them justify bigotry and hatred.
Now one of my siblings has reached out to let me know that my father’s health is rapidly declining. I’m wondering if I should rethink my decision and reach out to him, maybe even visit, before he dies.
But then I think of ICE’s attack on our country and the removal of the Pride flag from Stonewall and I don’t want to talk to people who support what is happening to vulnerable, marginalized people and the LGBTQ community.
My father was a good father to me. Even when I first came out to him, he was loving and supportive. I can’t square his behavior personally toward me with his support of this regime. The hypocrisy makes me so angry. How could he purport to love me and then vote against my freedoms?
I would love some suggestions about how to square my two opposing viewpoints.
Michael replies:
Many years ago, a great mentor taught me that the one thing you can count on in a relationship is learning to tolerate disappointment: Both being a disappointment, and being disappointed in the other person. This is true for love relationships and it’s also true for other significant relationships. All of us are different in some major ways and so we are bound at times to disappoint our loved ones in major ways, and to be disappointed by them in major ways.
That is why I’m not a fan of purity tests. To expect that someone must think like you (much less vote like you) in order for you to have a relationship with them is unrealistic, impractical, and sometimes damaging.
Of course, a person may hold some beliefs that give you reason not to want to have any connection to them. But is that the case here?
From your description, your family has always been loving and supportive of you as a gay man. That is no small thing. They seem to care about you enough to have continued to reach out, even though you have stopped talking to them.
Perhaps they had some other reasons for voting as they did, other than to roll back LGBTQ rights and to attack immigrants.
Instead of wondering how they could be so hypocritical, how about talking with them and striving to understand their choices? I don’t know what they will say, and you may hear different answers from your various family members. But at least you will get some clarity, rather than presuming that they made their voting choices from a place of malice. Then you will be in a better position to decide if you want a relationship going forward.
Another point to consider: Very few things are set in stone. Even if your family made their voting choices based on holding positions that you neither like nor respect, they may be open to shifting their views over time. One way to perhaps influence their thinking is by engaging with them, sharing your thoughts, and asking them to consider the possible consequences of their actions. If you choose to re-engage with them, two points to consider:
First, don’t expect that you will change their minds. You can advocate for what you want, but you have to let go of the results.
Second, they are more likely to consider your points if you do not approach them from a judgmental, self-righteous stance.
Many years ago, when I was newly a vegetarian, I was eager to challenge and “educate” friends who weren’t following my dietary ideas. Guess what? It didn’t work. Then I got some great advice: A great way to influence others to consider eating fewer animals was to serve them delicious vegetarian food.
The same point is true here. We can’t beat people over the head to agree with us. But if we approach them with some kindness, rather than with the certainty that we hold the moral high ground, we may help them see a bigger picture.
And sometimes, we too may see a bigger picture.
Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, and New York. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].
I don’t see the point in a relationship
Julius’ Bar ‘sip-in’ laid groundwork for Stonewall
Trans parent charged with kidnapping, allegedly fled to Cuba with child
Rehoboth Summer Kickoff Party set for May 15 with Ashley Biden
Curve magazine honors Washington Blade publisher
Inside the lonely world of MAGA gay men
Wagons ho! High-class, head-turning haulers
Rorschach stages ‘Dragon Play’ in unlikely, raw space
PHOTOS: National Champagne Brunch
