DC’s Central Park? A New Rendering of McMillan’s Planned Park
by Shilpi Paul
Earlier this week, UrbanTurf reported the news that the team behind with the McMillan Sand Filtration redevelopment had revamped their plans to include a larger park on the south end of the project.
Well, UrbanTurf got its hands on a few more detailed renderings of the park, and frankly, it looks incredible. Above and below are what could be DC’s (albeit much smaller) version ofNYC’s Central Park.
If you read the last post, you’ll know that the park will be on the south end of the 25-acre plot. The above rendering’s perspective is looking up at the park from southeast corner. Below, the rendering is looking up from a southwest perspective.
Renderings courtesy of Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects.
What do you think?
6 comments:
Like? Dislike? Any signs of life out there?
We fought hard to try to get the 2.6 acre park in the previous plan expanded, only to learn that there were reasons embedded in the secret "exclusive rights agreement" why this was not possible. Clearly the new plan is trying to go around the DC Water needs for certain real estate there. And granted, the park pictures look great. What is not so clear in these pictures is that the density of everything north of that point is tremendous,
75' to 130' tall buildings. Goodbye views. Looks like Rhode Island Ave. Metro or NoMa north of that point. Curious that this park didn't appear until force majeure made it happen. I don't think that HPRB is going to like the near-total obliteration of everything north of the park, but we'll see on 28 March. Oh, and by the way, McMillan was just listed on the National Register of Historic Places, I learned today. -Kirby.
I have to say, this has real potential. I never thought we'd get the entire parcel... DC gov't wants their revenue. But this size of a park is enough to do something truly world class. And it's much better situated between the old hood and the new hood. It provides a visual buffer against what will likely be cheaper architecture than the Victorians and Federals that are there now.
I never grieved the loss of the northern 1/3 because Washington Hospital Center is so ugly... so that is ok by me. The rowhouses are fine by me too as they activate the open space and provide additional revenue for our local businesses. I just didn't want to see big box stores come in and drive out local businesses. This more residential scheme seems to avoid that. Having a grocery will be a nice addition to...a premium one all the better in my book (though some might disagree and I understand their concern).
So where to go from here?
Well, I think that the park space needs additional thought. I've seen was Nelson Byrd Woltz is capable of and it's Much more than this. This is sort of a "low budget version" of some of the things they've done in other cities. Course with the scaled back development i think they have less money available for the park. Now, i think that that the neighborhood groups should turn their focus from rallying against the development to getting a few very innovative foundation funded projects underway on the (very large) park portion. I think that the first order of biz should be to find a way to fund a really great center (community center?) that the Catholic Univ. team put forward a few months ago. That was cutting edge, elegant, green, innovative and beautiful, integrating old architecture (the cells) and new (the building). I think we could also do something else very interesting such as an expanded farmers market or something like that on the other end..sort of like Eastern Market. I think it's unlikely that VMG is going to really make this thing world class, but we can work with them to get some funded projects underway (for instance Coca Cola foundation has always had a very keen interest in clean water...of which McMillan is a prime historical example).
At the end of the day the size of the park is really fantastic...just look at Google maps and you can see that only Malcom X park is slightly larger. Otherwise, this park is on scale with all the other "grid" parks in the city...Lafayette, Franklin, McPherson, Lincoln...all being smaller (or equal).
So... i think that this plan, as opposed to the previous one, has real possibilities. There is somewhere to go here... in fact, I'd say we're 75% there.
Oh and i wonder if the streetscaping of N. Capitol is still in the books...the last plan had a streetscape plan for N. Capitol... that would be an important part as it's such an eyesore right now.
Thank you for posting this. Although I have not been as engaged as I would like on this issue, I did vote in the neighborhood survey that was conducted (a year ago?) and at that time, expressed a preference for majority park space with some small scale development. I am somewhat disappointed and saddened by this rendering. It actually makes me long for the entire site to be a park. Further, I used to work in Midtown Manhattan and would frequently take lunch breaks in Central Park. I am so puzzled by the multiple references to Central Park - I don't see the likeness. Yes, it has a central lawn and is basically rectangular, but so are hundreds of other parks. Given that McMillan and CP are Olmsted designs, I feel it is a disservice to both sites to start using the shorthand of "a mini-Central Park". I think it could give people a grander impression of the design than what it would be in reality. In bald terms, it appears the siteplan gives the southern 1/4 of the parcel over to park space and the rest will be developed with tall block buildings a la the Harris Teeter/NoMa area. And some people's homes will be sacrificed. I think that is the bottom line message-especially for the many neighborhood folk who aren't following the issue closely.
I do appreciate that this is considered by some who are following or actively working on the issue to be a vast improvement on previous plans, and that it has been a long, hard battle just to get this far. i just hope this isn't the best we can get. If anyone could share information on the likely impact of a Historic Register designation on the development plans, I would like to learn more about that.
Sorry for so many comments...I'm weighing in on this from afar (dakar)...but i have a home on W street.
To make this park even better, i would argue that the eastern half of the south service court should become part and parcel of the park. The water silos could become water features and the pump house could still be a cafe surrounded by an outdoor beer garden/public plaza. The rest could be community gardens (vegetable gardens). The space between the silos and the pump houses (and perhaps some cells) of the service court could eventually be used for farmers markets or holiday markets or whatever. It should be the outdoor public space...contiguous with the amphitheatre and with the space around the community center. This scheme would leave as much open green space in the park as possible.
The other half of the south service court could still be a road, but it really should retain more of a "park" service road type feel-- A gravel road/path like you find at the periphery of the National Mall to beused to service the Community Center and park, but not general traffic to/from the rowhouses (which have ample access to both 1st and n. capitol already). The idea here is to expand that park feel into the south service court and to reduce the total amount of pavement on that side of the development. This scheme will make that public park space feel even bigger and will create visual and spatial unity with the rowhouse development on the northern periphery.
Post a Comment