See this response from Jeffrey Aten of Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects:
As the landscape architect for Vision McMillan Partners, I would agree, Paddington Reservoir is a great precedent for McMillan. We did in fact study it as we developed the concept for the new park at McMillan. I hope these two renderings below give you a sense of how we applied that inspiration.
Jeffrey Aten, PLA, CLARB, ASLA, Senior AssociateNelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects
Would have liked a more pronounced reference .... like an arcade of exposed vaults or something that exposed the skeleton of the site. But the architecture of the community center roof doesn't really emulate the vault structures in the same masterful way that Paddington does... Also, the closed in nature of Paddington makes it a more intimate, quiet, meditative space. Would love to see a cell dedicated uniquely to this concept of a quiet space...away from the hustle and bustle of N. Capitol and all the comings and goings of the community center entrance.
ReplyDeleteTo clarify,
ReplyDeleteThe elements that I think that make Paddington --as the reviewers on the video --a space unlike any other....are the following.
1) Above all it is the combination of the older historical elements with the new "drop ins" which combine to create a newly readapted space that both references and explains the former architecture and use of the reservoir and at the same time creates an unprecedented new space. I don't think that McMillan accomplishes this yet. The filtration towers are removed either on traffic medians and the vaults are not used sufficiently to play off the new elements. The newer elements do not emulate or compliment the old ....they appear to be wholly "other." The new and old worlds do not meld into a transcendent space in this mockup.
2) there is no grittiness retained in the VMP McMillan plan...the exposed vaults are reproductions of the old ones...at least they appear this way in the mockups. Paddington combines a refined elegance with archeological grittiness.
3) The intimacy of Paddington is what makes it work. Both McMillan and Paddington have a certain dimensionality... that is park on several planes... In Paddington this really is very intriguing...creating that "hanging garden" effect. However, the sheer size of the McMillan space makes the whole hanging garden thing lose it's magic. It's just too open. I realize that for some reason the HPRB wants to define McMillan as "wide open spaces" and "big panoramas".....however, it would be much more interesting to juxtapose these themes with other smaller, more intimate spaces like Paddington. This would also be much more in the tradition of the Olmsted group...at least the father. No FLO designed space would have only had one perspective..the thing that makes them indelible is the juxtapositions of open and closed spaces and the flow and connections in/out of those spaces.
4) Paddington's mood is fundamentally different. Calm reflecting pools, bounded spaces. McMillan will be more active and dynamic... both good, but these spaces need to be separate.
In the end they are different in scope, but I do see the possibility of integrating a space like Paddington into the VMP plan...preferably off the S. service court and to the south, contiguous with the Park. If the HPRB has nixed this already, i think they need to reconsider their decision. This kind of space is important if only because it helps explain the historical use of the site by exposing the infrastructure to the sky. During some of those hearings, it seemed like some of the Board's decisions were made off the cuff and a wrinkle of the nose was interpreted as a categorical no. It was as if entire concepts were killed after the third glass of wine. In any event, i think that HPRB is wrong not to include something like Paddington in this design. If the don't want one they need to be able to articulate why not in a compelling way because i think it's a shame that this will not happen.
Todd, a legacy of the McMillan Plan, The Cities Beautiful Movement, for a "world class" Capitol, doesn't get carried into the future by this McPark in front of condos and retail. Don't collaborate with the enemy! This has been an undemocratic, "fixed" process, and now they are "fixing" community support. Don't you think DC is a big enough embarrassment already?
ReplyDeleteThe real community rejected "surplussing", testimony was 40 to 2 against, they don't want the publicly owned park handed over to VMP in a $billion give away. Jeff Miller at DMPED is manipulating, falsifying the real community meeting. Make stand for the people!
Urban agriculture on a mass scale will be lost when they demolish the 20 acres of caverns,,wrong headed, loss of an incredible benefit to our city.
Please see this fascinating video: Indoor Farming, 5 times the yield of surface farms, one tenth the water consumption, no pesticides, no truck transport from California and Mexico, riper fresher food, even fresh Tilappia!!!
http://youtu.be/ILzWmw53Wwo
The corruption, racism, and economic class discrimination must end here! Why don't we do this whole project in Chevy Chase? We need our Olmsted park.