Brookland resident Jane Huntington testifies at the Mayor's Agent hearing on McMillan

Posting for  Brookland resident Jane Huntington testifies to Mayor Agent hearing Sept. 11 on McMillan boondoggle.

September 8, 2017

Re: Issues of In re. 2501 First Street NW: McMillan Sand Filtration Site before the
Mayor’s Agent

1) The VMP development project’s proposed historic preservation benefits for McMillan Park do not outweigh its historic preservation harms. In several initial meetings Jair Lynch and McMillan Park Committee members discussed a range of models for reviving McMillan -- the Yerbetan Cistern in Istanbul, Parc deBercy in Paris, Millennium Park in Chicago and others. A heightened national interest in historic and green space preservation in the years since has inspired other cities to commit to leadership in creative repurposing of green space and industrial ruins. Unfortunately, in the case of this VMP project, those options were taken off the table immediately.

2) The only special merit I can cite would be the green space. I understand the idea that a community center is considered special merit; I am an advocate for and participant in community center programs. However, without raising policy, pride and practical standards of service, leadership, and maintenance, a community center would be without special merit.

A project of special merit would not site a look-alike big box office building atop an industrial marvel of water purification.

A project of special merit would undertake to creatively reuse as many of the 20 subterranean sand-filter beds, the vaulted ceilings and supporting arches as possible.

A project of special merit would plan and design options for the whole of the water filtration apparatus.

A project of special merit would offer educational experiences--history, science, industrial design, architecture, imagination and more.

A project of special merit would not have offered a bit of bait and switch, once “borrowing” the water feature of an alternative design proffered by Dr. Miriam Gusevich and students in her Catholic University of America School of Architecture class...and then removing that water feature due to “expense.”

A project of special merit would capitalize not only on the historic elements of the site but also its location in the heart of the nation’s capital, a link between east and west, a historic view shed, its potential to truly be a place of special merit.

3) The proposed demolition and subdivision are the wrong concept for this years-long flawed project. The medical office building was added to the mediocre mix about the time that Friends of McMillan Park conducted tours of the park and its fascinating underground. Many people took great interest in preservation and repurposing. I remember meeting Jeff Miller, a Vice President of Trammel Crow. Pleasant and solicitous before he moved into the DMPED Office as Deputy Mayor for a very short time. He ordered a stop to the popular tours.  Eight thousand people have signed petitions to reconsider the development plans.

4) Alternatives to the proposed demolition and subdivision have been prohibited from consideration by too many Deputy Mayors for Planning and Economic Development and by Vision McMillan Partners and their lawyers.

In 1986 District officials chose a $9.3 million purchase of the property from the Army Corps of Engineers when they de-accessioned the east-of-First Street part of the reservoir. Those District officials had development in mind. They could have chosen to accept the land and its covenants for $1 with a commitment to maintain McMillan Park as a park.

Since then officials throughout the administrations of Barry, Kelly, Barry, Williams, Fenty, Gray, Bowser have stubbornly refused to consider options other than “development” by which they mean destruction, capitalization.

Over those years the site, along with its great re-purposing potential, has been malignly neglected. Maintaining a strategic element in the City Beautiful movement led by Senator McMillan and a commitment to preserve and enhance this gem in the “emerald necklace” would obtain the special merit of many “significant benefits having a high priority for community services.”

Resident stakeholders have tried in every way in meetings, testimonies, writings, hearings, to propose alternatives only to be rebuffed in every way. Lied to, dismissed, sometimes patronized,  vilified. A public relations firm, Baltimore's Jamie Fontaine Agency, was paid first by the city, then, oops!, paid by VMP,  to cast us-- advocates for true special merit--as “non-local opposition.” “Friends of McMillan has been hijacked by non-local, special interests and is spreading misinformation to further its agenda;” "neutralize opposition", "provide continuous cover for elected officials", "change public perception to that of majority support for VMP" and so on to discredit a small, determined group of citizen warriors.

I reiterate. A number of reasonable alternatives have been proposed by architects, designers, preservationists, lawyers, artists, universities and, of course, citizens, to three decades of political leadership in Washington, DC in consideration of the special merit of

McMillan Park and Sand Filtration Site.

Jane Huntington

Daniel Goldon Wolkoff
1231 Randolph Street, NE
Washington, DC 20017
Tel: 202-232-8391