Technicality Holds up $2,500,000 for Neighborhood Park

Funding technicalities have held up $2,500,000 in funds dedicated for a Shaw park. D.C. government agencies have put the park on “hold” for over one year all because they can’t find a way to approve funds to an artist for a commemorative sculpture.

The triangle park above is located adjacent the home of noted historian Carter G. Woodson, recently purchased by the National Park Service to convert into a museum. City officials planned to convert it into commemorative park with money set aside for neighborhood enhancement during the construction of the Walter E. Washington Convention Center and matching federal funds. Planning was moving forward and the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which administered the Convention Center neighborhood funds, announced two years ago an artist had been selected to create a sculpture of Dr. Woodson.

Legal technicalities have put the project on permanent hold. In an email to me last fall, D.C. Councilmember Jack Evans described what happened next:

in January 2007, the MOU (memorandum of agreement) between DDOT, Federal Highways and the National Trust was distributed to the parties for execution. The final stop was the [D.C.] Office of Procurement, however after reviewing the document, OCP has determined that DDOT is not authorized to enter into an MOU with an outside entity. This came as a surprise to DDOT since the agency has several contracts, including the Heritage Trail contract with Cultural Tourism DC and to make a long story short, OCP has indicated that DDOT needs to either go through a competitive process or follow the procedures to justify a “sole source contract”. In the meantime, I understand DDOT is trying to find the appropriate documentation in the Federal legislation that authorizes DDOT to enter into MOU’s such as this.

Evans pledged to help move the project forward: “The city agencies need to work together to find a timely solution to this problem. If the project falls through, the City’s investment of thousands of dollars already invested in this work will go for naught. I will do all in my power to see that this does not happen.” Sadly, I have heard nothing since this correspondence.

The local ANC Commissioner Alex Padro told me last fall he was “getting ready to go public with the facts” about how the Fenty administration is allowing the project to “go down the drain,” although if he tried to win press attention I did not see it. Mayor Fenty’s office was unhelpful as well, writing in response to my correspondence, “We agree that this is an important project for the neighborhood and for Dr. Woodson’s legacy. Right now, the project is on hold. We are in communication with the DC Commission on the Arts and Humanities to see if they will be willing to take on management of this project. …”

The Case for the Park

Despite its diminutive site, the Carter G. Woodson Park presents a unique opportunity to celebrate neighborhood history and provide an amenity to neighborhood residents. A celebrated scholar, journalist, and publisher Carter G. Woodson is credited with virtually single-handily founding the field of African American history. His efforts to fight racial discrimination, improve public education, and introduce African American history to America and the world deserves to be studied and celebrated.

The park site also presents interesting opportunities for neighborhood improvement. Located at a prominent intersection at Rhode Island Avenue and Q Street NW, it could be an important gateway to the neighborhood. If developed, the park could be used by the women in residence at the YWCA, school children at Shaw Junior High and Seaton Elementary, and thousands of residents of apartments, row homes, and subsidized housing in the neighborhood. People waiting for the G8 bus also have no benches or shelter from the weather, something which a new design could accommodate. (Below, left) Furthermore, three longtime vacant properties border the park. New city investment could help spark redevelopment of these longtime eyesores.

Since my polite inquiries and the assistance of the neighborhood’s elected officials has not resolved the problem, I encourage all District residents to contact the officials below. Tell them to find a solution to the legal technicalities, approve funds for design and construction of the Carter G. Woodson Park. I have no doubt a legal solution can be found to pay for the art for this much-needed park.

Contacts

Emeka C. Moneme
Director, D.C. Department of Transportation
Emeka.Moneme@dc.gov

David P. Gragan, CPPO
Chief Procurement Officer, D.C. Office of Contracting and Procurement
David.Gragan@dc.gov

Reba Pittman-Walker
CEO and General Manager, Washington Convention Center Authority
rwalker@dcconvention.com

The Bridges of Rock Creek Park

The unfortunate collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota last week has put attention on the country’s bridges. Many of the Washington, D.C. bridges are quite old, and well documented in the Library of Congress’ Historic American Engineering Record, available online through the American Memory website. The images here and more are all available on the site - simply click on the image and then the permalink in the description on Flickr.

Although the Washington region’s largest and best known bridges cross the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers, for some reason I am more interested in the bridges that cross Rock Creek Parkway. Bridging the river, road, and the natural gorge, the bridges are easily overlooked, but possess a subtle drama.

One of the most dramatic is Connecticut Avenue’s Taft Memorial Bridge. When it was completed in 1907 for almost $900,000, it was thought the largest unreinforced concrete bridge in the world. A series of excellent Historic American Engineering Record drawing illustrates the bridge’s design and construction.

This much smaller bridge connecting Pennsylvania Avenue to Georgetown contains its own story. Encased in cement dating from 1916, the bridge still contains large cast iron pipes constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1856.

Are these old bridges, some dating back over 100 years, safe? According to the Washington Post, bridges dating from the 1950s and 1960s that raise the most concerns, since that generation of bridges was built with less steel to save money. It turns out older bridges tend to be over-engineered since their designers new less about the strength of their designs. Nonetheless, last week’s tragedy shows we cannot take our infrastructure for granted.

> W. Post: “Generation of Bridges Was Built With Less Steel,” “Inspections Note Significant Flaws, But Officials Call Area Bridges Safe”
> Library of Congress - American Memory Architectural Records

Planning Underway for New Shaw Park

Design work has begun for a new Carter G. Woodson Park, located in my neighborhood one block from the Carter G. Woodson house at the intersection of Rhode Island Avenue, Q Street, and 9th Streets NW. According to the project’s manager at the National Trust for Historic Preservation, who is overseeing the planning, the project has been delayed due to D.C. Department of Transportation “contracting” problems. According to the National Trust, current designs do not include any seating at the park, but will be designed with future bench additions in mind. The park will feature a larger-than-life sculpture of noted historian Woodson by sculptor Raymond Kaskey. At least one community meeting is planned to get input on the design, and the project is planned to be completed in roughly one year. Today the park is nearly entirely paved and a bus stop has been long removed, both measures I assume were made to discourage loitering and criminal activity.

> NPS: Carter G. Woodson National Historic Site
> National Trust: D.C. Artist to Create Public Art Installation at Carter G. Woodson Park
> See my previous post on D.C. triangle parks

Georgetown Park Under Construction

After three decades of planning, debate, and delays, construction on the Georgetown Waterfront Park is finally underway in earnest. These photos were taken in late May. When it is complete in Spring 2008 the park will be the largest park created in Washington since Constitution Gardens on the National Mall in 1976.

The design includes an interactive fountain and river stairs (seen below), a promenade and labrynth.

> NPS: Georgetown Waterfront Park
> WashCycle: Georgetown Waterfront Rebuild
> W. Post’s Roger K. Lewis: “Planned Waterfront Park in Georgetown Lacks Some Crucial Elements” (March 2005)

Ballston Examined

I completed this essay for the final assignment for my urban design class. The assignment was to conduct an analysis of this block adjacent the Ballston Metro Station in Arlington County, Virginia. My study area is part of the “Ballston-Rosslyn Corridor,” a nationally-known example of smart growth. Along the corridor, the county has added roughly 40,000 residents, 20 million square feet of office, and one million square feet of retail — with only a negligible increase in automobile traffic, thanks to bus and Metrorail use.

In the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., adjacent the Ballston Metrorail station stands a collection of buildings far taller than any in the national capital. Reaching 10, 15, even 22 stories into the sky, these buildings contain offices, shops, apartments, and a hotel. Unlike most cities, however, this compact urban node has sprung out of the ground in just twenty years. 17 of the 19 buildings nestled in the area’s roughly 20 acres were completed since 1980. (fig. 1)

Nothing existing here before anticipated the scale and character of the development. The two oldest buildings in the study area are at an entirely different scale than the new construction. The surrounding neighborhoods of single-family homes and garden apartments have different lot sizes, street widths, and building rhythm. County officials and private builders have chosen to deviate from the established urban patterns, deliberately striving to knit together new development into a new urban texture. All of the buildings here were developed under specific zoning adopted in 1979 in response to the construction of the train station. While this zoning has evolved somewhat since its first adoption, the rapid development of the area creates an intriguing case study in the urbanity created by a specific set of polices and standards. While boasting clearly urbane aspirations, the collection of buildings has not created a coherent urban space. My analysis falls into three categories: the area’s poor street void definition, lack of an open space hierarchy, and its streetscape inconsistency.

A coherent urban space depends on a clearly defined street form. Considering the building footprints alone, in surrounding neighborhoods the streets are clearly defined by rows of single-family homes. (fig. 2) This system of what William C. Ellis has called a structure of voids. Moving to the study area the structure of voids transitions to a structure of solids, where each building has a unique shape, only loosely related to the adjacent streets. In order to visualize the structure of voids for the study area a rough, three-dimensional sketch was created. (fig. 3) The illustration depicts highly variable street spaces, quite distinct from the regularity in traditional urbanism. The visitor navigating these streets perceives the unfolding of a variety of spaces among buildings, not a street with a clear definition, beginning and end.

To determine the cause of the irregular distribution of public space we must examine the underlying structure of the district. The study area’s 24 lots range in size from some similar in scale plots intended for a single-family home, to lots large enough to encompass an entire city block. (fig. 4)

When developed under Arlington County’s zoning code, this variable underlying structure has profound design implications. The area’s zoning (C-O-A) requires 10% of the total site area for each building be landscaped open space. This provision guarantees the public open space will be found heterogeneously distributed throughout the area as each developer negotiates with county officials about what 10% portion of his lot will become public. In some areas this space has been coordinated to create larger courtyards, but the locations of these courtyards must be opportunistically located at the intersection of similarly sized lots. The result is a proliferation of awkward, ill-used open spaces, instead of the creation of larger, more coherent spaces. (fig. 5)

The proliferation of landscaped space drains the potential vitality of the larger parks, which in another setting could perform the role as a district-wide focal point. An interesting counterpoint to the success of nearby Market Commons in Clarendon. This mixed-use complex contains most of the public space in the area, and sits just off a street that has been intensely developed creating a continuous street wall. (fig. 6) While the public spaces in Ballston were sparsely used on a recent visit, the Clarendon Commons was bustling with activity. Of course, the success of the spaces is also related to the distribution of commercial space – in Ballston it is concentrated in the large mall.

Finally, county regulations also translate the variable lot sizes into a variable streetscape. In order to incentivize lot consolidation and the construction of apartments, the C-O-A zoning creates a hierarchy of allowable building heights depending on the primary use of the building and the lot size. Taller buildings can be built on larger lots, and apartment buildings can be built taller than office buildings. The result has been buildings over a considerable range of heights (fig. 7)

Combined with the open space requirement, the result of the regulations is buildings of highly variable heights and configurations. Despite text expressing the county’s desire to cultivate street level retail, the policy regime creates an irregular streetscape both at the pedestrian scale and building scale. Lastly, the zoning code’s parking requirements mean the buildings contain over 7,000 parking spaces. While for the most part these spaces have been cleverly embedded into the buildings, the car entrances and exits create additional interruptions to the street level fabric. (fig. 8 )

Although the district does not create the fabric of traditional urbanism, it cannot be said to be a failure. Meandering among the buildings, the visitor is invited to discover new urban spaces and stores and restaurants in unexpected locations. The city builders have achieved extremely high density in a highly landscaped, almost peaceful setting. While deviating from the traditional urbanism they espouse, their insistence on public landscape surrounding every building has created an alternate system, perhaps not unlike the landscape urbanism described by theorists like James Corner. As we leave Ballston, it must be noted this is an immature landscape in urban time. Only time will tell how its remaining underdeveloped parcels will evolve. Perhaps in that time the many young street trees (fig. 4a, 4c) will mature, and the landscape itself play an increasingly important role in defining more clearly the urban fabric.

Fixing Mount Vernon Square

This post is adapted from a class project I completed recently

In the film Enemy of the State, two characters decide to rendezvous in Washington, D.C.’s Mount Vernon Square. However, instead of using Washington’s square, the filmmakers opted to shoot the scene in a square of the same name located in Baltimore. While I don’t know the actual reason for this decision, I think it could have been caused by the architectural form of the square.

While both are similar in size and share the presence of a church building, we will see that Baltimore’s square is much more clearly defined in space, and would certainly have made a more visually satisfying backdrop to an urban rendezvous. Before turning to the topic of how Mount Vernon Square could be improved, let’s take a look at a three dimensional analysis.

I will analyze the square and its surrounding blocks through two approaches: creating a three dimensional model of the buildings present that give the square its form, and a second model to show the negative spaces or voids.

Now let’s take a look at Baltimore’s Mount Vernon Square.

A variety of architectural styles itself does not prevent the creation of a unified urban fabric. However, when these styles speak in a different language in their dialogue with their neighbors and the street, the result can be an intelligible cacophony. This is the case for Mount Vernon Square, where as a result of the highly contrasting forms and styles, each building speaks as an individual. Let us take a walk around the square, examining the architecture of what we find.

This early 20th Century building (left) was built to serve as the central office for a labor union. The zero setback from the street creates a sharply defined street wall and understated architectural style. While this style of architecture works well in context with similar buildings, here it stands alone on a nearly empty block, facing blocks with quite different forms and architectural styles. Instead of “reading” as a contributor to a larger street or block, this building comes across as an awkward anachronism, a solitary reminder of a previous urban logic.

The Carnegie Library is designed in the Beaux-Arts style, echoing other monuments to City Beautiful Elsewhere in the city. However, it is a proud civic building without a civic use, as it has not housed the library since the 1960s.
Today the building is used as offices for cultural organizations and for special events. Like an old man all dressed up and nowhere to go, the building’s elegant architecture has been stripped of both visitors and its functional meaning.

The Washington Convention Center is probably the must-discussed building on the square. Its design was the result of a contentious public process. The original massing caused one member of the National Capital Planning Commission to characterize the design as a “battleship” plowing into Shaw, and in response to neighborhood concerns the design was modified to minimize the overwhelming height and size through both architectural techniques, sinking it into the ground, and including retail space at the street level. While the high perforated façade may create visual interest, the multiple indentations and projections do not clearly define the square. Instead of serving pedestrians and public space, the structure seems scaled to the tour buses and tractor trailers that deliver goods and visitors to the cavernous convention floor.

If Mount Vernon Square is underutilized, thanks in part to a poor sense of urban space, how might it be improved?

1. Improve the physical definition of square. At the core of it, Mount Vernon Square is not clearly defined as architectural space. While this is the most important flaw, it is potentially the most difficult to fix. New construction at the northwest corner should match the existing building in setback and scale, and serve to define the streets. New construction at the northeast corner, where today there is a small parking lot, should both define the streets and also clearly articulate reflect the overall square shape of the space, including a generous flat face facing the square. The small parks at the east and west sides should be re-designed to be better integrated with the central green space

2. Improve design to accommodate and encourage pedestrian use. Although located near heavily trafficked pedestrian destinations, the square does a poor job of serving their needs and attracting and retaining pedestrian users. 8th Street should be opened to automobile traffic, and changes made to the ground floor retail to make it more visible to passing pedestrians. The pathways and paved spaces around the library building could be re-designed to create a shaded plaza and convenient walkways reflecting current pedestrian patterns. The traffic pattern could even be evaluated to see if additional on-street parking could be allowed to create a buffer between the heavy flows of traffic and plaza.

3. Create programming to better utilize square space. Like some of the city’s other public spaces, the square could host public events, particularly at times when there is less commuter traffic on neighboring streets like weekends or evenings.

Here’s what kind of buildings could enhance the square.

The neglect of public open space is by no means limited to Mount Vernon Square. I have previously written about the widely varied fate of the city’s multitute of small triangle parks, which are split up between various city and federal agencies. There are two initiatives underway to improve the quality of public spaces in the city. The National Park Service has launched an effort to create a plan for the National Mall to enhance the visitor experience and plan for future growth. Another effort called CapitalSpace was recently announced to oversee all of the city’s parks and public open space. This long-overdue initiative is a joint project between the D.C. Office of Planning, D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation, National Park Service and National Capital Planning Commission, and together the groups hope to create an action agenda to “establish a coordinated, connected citywide system of parks” that serve all neighborhoods. I hope these two programs result in increased attention to the city’s many public spaces.