Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 21:22:50 -0800
From: dianne_brns@yahoo.com
Subject: Upcoming Meetings: Community Benefits Ageement w/VMP
Community Awareness:
All Ward 5E residents are welcome to attend the upcoming meetings.
Attached are dates of upcoming meetings and other info for your viewing.
Please share with your neighbors.
Attached are dates of upcoming meetings and other info for your viewing.
Please share with your neighbors.
Respectfully,
Dianne Barnes
SMD 5E09 Commissioner
Dianne Barnes
SMD 5E09 Commissioner
13 comments:
Monday, February 17, is Washington's Birthday. Can someone confirm if the BCA will meet that day or meet the following Monday?
Fact: His name was Olmsted, not Olmstead.
If you fall somewhere in between hating this development, but finding that at least the park has some potential to build upon. Join the MAG park committee.... we're trying to get this park improved to the point where it will be truly useful to the surrounding communities. A few of the key ideas: move the road on the south service court to one side and make the sand tower contiguous with the park...allowing for a pedestrian space where markets, cafes, and outdoor art can be displayed. Right now the towers and the pump house are in a street median! Move the amphitheatre to a place where people can hear (not over the traffic on N. Capitol). Integrate a children's playground somewhere! Adaptively reuse the towers on the south service court and pump house. Lift the "roof" on one of the cells, exposing the underground vault structures...creating a "arcade"...sort of a like an ambulatory on a cathedral...where a community gardens can be integrated. All great ideas that would increase the usability of this area! But we need some community support to get VMP to move off the dime!
Todd some of these idea are in the plans???? opening a cell...service courts near the retail for markets and the amphitheater which needs to be near parking on the north section???????
We are talking about the S. service court...right now the sand filtration towns and the pump house are in the median trafffic on both sides...rendering the structures completely unusable as they will be cut off by traffic. We want both lanes moved to the north side of the south service court (both lanes of traffic i mean) so that the towers and the pump house are continguous to the park. Opening a cell....again, they aren't opening any cell....they have a cell that can be "gazed" into from the community center, but it will remain closed...it is to demonstrate how the cells are used. This concept is different, it's about opening up the cell to the sky and creating a public space inside the cell... they are not talking about allowing people in the cells. Amphitheatre moving is simply about usability.... as it stands there are two problems: 1) it is on N. Capitol.... very noisy and will force people to use amplification. 2) the "stage" area is basically occupied by the water feature...there is no real stage. As it is designed it is not really practical. This park, as it stands, once you really get into the details of it, isn't well thought out or programmed. But it does have the potential....the space is there at least. It needs significant refinement.
but honestly, this is really interesting in terms of communications strategies, because actually none of these are the REAL issues. They are fake issues.
For instance:
I don't know if anyone says that there isn't sufficient park space in this current iteration. That was a criticism of earlier plans where there was not much park, and VMP counted it's streets, sidewalks and roof space as open space. Which was deceptive. But i've not heard that criticism of this plan.
Nobody cares that much about about the silos...they care about the underground vaults and most of those are going to be destroyed. There isn't even much adaptive reuse of those vaults being proposed.
I don't think that the size of the buildings is really controversial. What is controversial is that they are so damn ugly. At every single hearing people are saying that....i know a professional architect that says he said it directly to the VMP architects at a feedback session.....and he is pro McMillan....but he said your architecture is a disaster. The zoning hearing folks have called them out on referencing the brutalist style of Washington Hospital Center rather than the surrounding neighborhood architecture. Across the board people hate the architecture...not the layout of this plan.
The HPRB couldn't approve the plans because there are covenants in place that make it impossible to do that right now without Mayor's agent approval.
And regarding the sole source....VMP was shortlisted with five bidders. Why the NCRC shortlisted 5 bidders and what the criteria was and who those bidders were....that's not been clarified. Nobody has ever said this was sole source. But it wasn't a fully open bid either.
So let's talk about the real issues and not get diverted by fake ones.
I . care . very . much . about . the . silos.
I second Scott's comment about the silos... though moving the street north and integrating the south silos into the park would be nice.
Ok...i take it back. We care about the silos too. But i would argue that the extraordinary architecture on this site is mostly underground. But that is my opinion i'll warrant.
Todd,
Thanks for the response. Personally I do care about the height of the buildings on the site and have heard the same from others. One concern that I have is it's still unclear whether the height of the buildings justifies demolition of the cells. For example, the 2000 structural/geotechnical engineering evaluation provides estimates for preservation of the cells with 4 story structures built on top, not a 13 story building and 7/8 story building. I also know that the height of the multi-family/retail building just south of the North Service Court has been a concern for residents of Stronghold.
I believe this will be one of the topics heavily debated as part of the various zoning hearings that are planned in the coming months.
Mathew Bader
BCA MAG Representative
Todd, I was at the HPRB meeting when the newest VMP plan was approved. Shocking though it may be, a lot of the current aspects of the building design were apparently demanded by HPRB... I liked some of the old designs a lot better, but I heard HPRB folks talking about how the new buildings are more historically appropriate. Go figure.
(Oh: and like the vast majority of Bloomingdale and Stronghold residents, I don't care at all about either the silos or the vaults. Why? *Because I can't get to them.* I'll take 25 acres of city over 25 acres of industrial waste any day.
Yes, it was true that VMP reacted to every sneeze and itch of the HPRB. They would cough and more parking would appear! It would have been much better to have a true vision articulated for this site than simply a reactive group think exercise....that's what it deserves....just look at the iterations of the VMP plan since the beginning... vastly different one from another, but very little reflecting what the community requested. Much more reflecting HPRB's demands. I don't disagree there.
Post a Comment