See this post from the brand-new WCP Housing Complex reporter Aaron Wiener on Bloomingdale`s McMillan Sand Filtration site. Right out of the gate!
D.C.`s Biggest Development Project: Gone Today, Here Tomorrow?
Posted by Aaron Wiener on Sep. 20, 2012 at 3:23 pm
Twenty-five years ago, the D.C. government paid $9.3 million for a 25-acre site along North
Capitol Street that it hoped to develop into a mixed-use community. And for a quarter century, the McMillan Sand Filtration Site has sat fenced off and vacant, a waste of valuable space that leaves most passersby wondering about the vaguely alien mounds and towers.
Back in 1987, according to deputy mayor Victor Hoskins` prepared testimony at a D.C. Council roundtable yesterday, ``the intent then, as it is now, was to provide retail amenities, community resources, and most importantly jobs in an area that has been historically underserved by these features.`` But year after year, bickering over the development plans has maintained the status quo—that is, a state of deterioration that forced the city to shut down the old landmark to even the occasional tours that used to pass through.
But — at the risk of ignoring the lessons of history — it does appear that there`s some
momentum now for the latest development plans. Despite pockets of continuing
local opposition, the Advisory Neighborhood Commission whose domain includes
the site voted Monday to support the Master Development Plan drafted by Vision
McMillan Partners, led by EYA, Jair Lynch Development Partners, and Trammell
Crow Company. And at yesterday`s hearing, the two D.C. councilmembers present—
Kenyan McDuffie of Ward 5, where the site is located, and Michael Brown, who
chairs the Committee on Economic Development and Housing—both strongly backed
the plan. So did a number of community members who showed up despite what one
termed ``McMillan fatigue`` in order to help end the decades of foot-dragging.
And then there were the opponents. Residents of neighboring Bloomingdale expressed
their fear that the development would worsen the flooding that`s repeatedly hit
the area this year. Others worried that the nine acres of open space were
inadequate, given the results of an local survey showing that the overwhelming
majority of neighbors wanted at least half of the site to remain green. Some
complained about the increase in traffic that might result. One local, Kirby
Vining, likened the administration`s hunger for development to ``prostitution.``
It`s hard to please everyone. Just take a look at the ``nine core goals`` for the
site, according to Hoskins:
1. Meaningful PRESERVATION that captures the history and beauty of McMillan
2. Large, inviting OPEN SPACES throughout the site
3. GROCERY and local, neighborhood serving RETAIL
4. Economic diversification and JOB CREATION
5. Expansion of HEALTHCARE options to serve our residents
6. Mix of HOUSING types and AFFORDABILITY levels
7. HIGHEST QUALITY planning, architecture, and park design
8. BALANCE community needs with District resources
9. Concurrence with the District`s COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
You`d expect a grab-bag of aims like this to produce a scheme roughly resembling this or this . Instead, the planners appear to have created a design with reasonable coherence and non-negligible neighborhood support, the inevitably NIMBY outcry notwithstanding.
Of course, there`s still plenty of tinkering to do. But let`s hope that the opponents of the current design work constructively to incorporate their ideas rather than stall the whole project for another 10 or 20 years. Brown hammered this point home in a forceful jab at the naysayers.
``I am extremely serious about getting past the rhetoric, the half-truths and frankly some of the deliberate false information that some chose to put out instead of having honest discussion,`` Brown said. ``What that does is takes away from discussing the two real issues that must be dealt with if this project is to be an unqualified success of well-planned and well-executed community development. Those issues are storm and waste water management and traffic.``
And maybe some additional park space. (Though parks are that much more useful if there are people around to use them—and it`s hard to argue with a grocery store in an area that`s lacking easy access to one.) But these are, given the magnitude of the project, not much more than details, and there ought to be a compromise that`ll allow development to begin in our lifetimes.
After all, something, anything, is better than the wasteland we`ve got now.
Posted by Aaron Wiener on Sep. 20, 2012 at 3:23 pm
Twenty-five years ago, the D.C. government paid $9.3 million for a 25-acre site along North
Capitol Street that it hoped to develop into a mixed-use community. And for a quarter century, the McMillan Sand Filtration Site has sat fenced off and vacant, a waste of valuable space that leaves most passersby wondering about the vaguely alien mounds and towers.
Back in 1987, according to deputy mayor Victor Hoskins` prepared testimony at a D.C. Council roundtable yesterday, ``the intent then, as it is now, was to provide retail amenities, community resources, and most importantly jobs in an area that has been historically underserved by these features.`` But year after year, bickering over the development plans has maintained the status quo—that is, a state of deterioration that forced the city to shut down the old landmark to even the occasional tours that used to pass through.
But — at the risk of ignoring the lessons of history — it does appear that there`s some
momentum now for the latest development plans. Despite pockets of continuing
local opposition, the Advisory Neighborhood Commission whose domain includes
the site voted Monday to support the Master Development Plan drafted by Vision
McMillan Partners, led by EYA, Jair Lynch Development Partners, and Trammell
Crow Company. And at yesterday`s hearing, the two D.C. councilmembers present—
Kenyan McDuffie of Ward 5, where the site is located, and Michael Brown, who
chairs the Committee on Economic Development and Housing—both strongly backed
the plan. So did a number of community members who showed up despite what one
termed ``McMillan fatigue`` in order to help end the decades of foot-dragging.
And then there were the opponents. Residents of neighboring Bloomingdale expressed
their fear that the development would worsen the flooding that`s repeatedly hit
the area this year. Others worried that the nine acres of open space were
inadequate, given the results of an local survey showing that the overwhelming
majority of neighbors wanted at least half of the site to remain green. Some
complained about the increase in traffic that might result. One local, Kirby
Vining, likened the administration`s hunger for development to ``prostitution.``
It`s hard to please everyone. Just take a look at the ``nine core goals`` for the
site, according to Hoskins:
1. Meaningful PRESERVATION that captures the history and beauty of McMillan
2. Large, inviting OPEN SPACES throughout the site
3. GROCERY and local, neighborhood serving RETAIL
4. Economic diversification and JOB CREATION
5. Expansion of HEALTHCARE options to serve our residents
6. Mix of HOUSING types and AFFORDABILITY levels
7. HIGHEST QUALITY planning, architecture, and park design
8. BALANCE community needs with District resources
9. Concurrence with the District`s COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
You`d expect a grab-bag of aims like this to produce a scheme roughly resembling this or this . Instead, the planners appear to have created a design with reasonable coherence and non-negligible neighborhood support, the inevitably NIMBY outcry notwithstanding.
Of course, there`s still plenty of tinkering to do. But let`s hope that the opponents of the current design work constructively to incorporate their ideas rather than stall the whole project for another 10 or 20 years. Brown hammered this point home in a forceful jab at the naysayers.
``I am extremely serious about getting past the rhetoric, the half-truths and frankly some of the deliberate false information that some chose to put out instead of having honest discussion,`` Brown said. ``What that does is takes away from discussing the two real issues that must be dealt with if this project is to be an unqualified success of well-planned and well-executed community development. Those issues are storm and waste water management and traffic.``
And maybe some additional park space. (Though parks are that much more useful if there are people around to use them—and it`s hard to argue with a grocery store in an area that`s lacking easy access to one.) But these are, given the magnitude of the project, not much more than details, and there ought to be a compromise that`ll allow development to begin in our lifetimes.
After all, something, anything, is better than the wasteland we`ve got now.
4 comments:
Thanks for reporting on the McMillan project on your first day, Aaron.
What do you all think of Aaron's comments? Anyone alive out there ?
Well, Aaron seems to underplay the degree of community opposition to this plan... in fact, despite the ANC5C approval, every other neighborhood that surrounds the site along with Howard University oppose it. Aaron's article unstates this to a great degree. ANC5C approval was carried by reps whose neighborhoods do not border McMillan...who just want the amenities. Fine. The real problem here is getting to a plan that is worthy of the site. Once this is built there is no going back. I used to live on Rock Creek Park before moving to Bloomingdale...show me where this sizable accessible green space is on this side of town. There ISNT any! Mixed development? Fine...but come on...stop the bullshit of reporting that there is 9 acres of open space in this plan....the rooftops of officebuildings and the sidewalk corridors DONT COUNT!!! We aren't chumps...we know what we're looking at. At some point they are going to have to get some vision...but unfortunately it seems that the leaders of Washington DC just don't have any. It takes a city like NY or Chicago to really pull off world class urban development. DC seems to get lost in its short term desire.... ah we long for the days when the French had to design our city for us! Bring them back!!!
Hopefully, this story will not be over any time soon.
If you haven’t done it yet, pick a nice day and stand on the site. Because the site is elevated above downtown, you have unobstructed views of the U.S. Capitol, Washington Monument and even northern Virginia. Looking west, the National Cathedral seems to be within walking distance. Looking east, the campus and dome of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception dominates the view. I would recommend you go as the afternoon is fading and watch the reservoir reflect beautiful sunsets night after night. It is unique in its commanding views and the added attraction of the largest water body in the City.
If you live in Stronghold, you can kiss these views good-bye. If you prefer landscapes designed to beautify our surroundings, this is not the plan for you.
This is the District of Columbia's most significant site, and hopefully, if there is a God, it will not be churned into another version of Shirlington any time soon.
Post a Comment