Soldiers Home on NPR

[from the publisher]

Anyone hear the Soldiers Home segment on NPR (88.5) today? Petworth resident Reyn Anderson took part by phone.

If you missed it, click here for the mp3. I also added it to the In the Media section in the left sidebar.

Comments

[John King]

Reyn did a fantastic job staying on message and getting the big points across. This is not an easy feat in the call-in radio format, and she was well prepared, responsive to comments, and completely up to the challenge.

I wish she had hammered home points related to open space and the dearth of park space east of Rock Creek Park. That said, she did make these points (with a nice statistic thrown in) and you can't hammer every point, or you're just a hammerhead. (Like Jonetta Rose Barras -- man, does she bring Kojo down or what?)

[Sandy]

I hope that we in the neighborhood can keep this in perspective. I think one thing to keep in mind is that this is not us against Soldier's Home. Others may want to cast it that way for their own reasons, but that doesn't mean that we do. Soldier's Home is a part of this neighborhood and their financial health is part of the well being of this neighborhood. This is about working to make sure that the federal and District government provide what is needed for veterans AND for residents.

There is a serious park space issue in this part of the city. I just tried to run some park per capita figures. The area west of Rock Creek Park and north of M St. has about 1020 acres of federal and District Park land and a population about about 87,000. The area between 16th St. and the Red Line of the Metro north of M St. has about 271 acres of park and a population of about 147,000 people. I might be off bit on these population figures but I think it's about right. That's 1.16 acres of park per 100 people living west of Rock Creek Park and 0.2 acres of park per 100 people living between 16th St. and the Red Line. Most of that is a good ways north of here and we don't have the kinds of private lawns that folks on the other side of Rock Creek Park do. I am not making it up and the District Director of Parks Planning is not making it up when we say that the kids in this area play in traffic triangles and circles. They are voting with their feet about the way we have taken care of their recreational needs.

In the overall plan that set up the Districts' park and open space system in 1902, Soldier's Home campus was open to the public and identified as a major recreational area. One can only think that it was expected to stay that way when this neighborhood was laid out and built in the 1910s and early 1920s because there's no other real park in the area for a fairly dense development. And now there's basically there's no where to add park except to tear down buildings or regain public access to some of Soldier's Home. The Federal Comprehensive Plan that currently guides land development for federal agencies in the District specifically says that efforts should be made to make the Soldier's Home Campus accessible to the public for recreation. This development is actually a real opportunity to address the park problem in this area. It's an opportunity to say to the District and Federal governments that they have to take care of the veterans and their other residents as well.

I think that means us as neighbors working to make sure that the development plan includes some meaningful park space. The AFRH is currently proposing that 4 acres as park on a meadow north of 1st St. That's 4 acres of park out of the 172 acres they propose to develop. Neighbors working on this have been focusing on trying to get the meadow at the corner of Rock Creek Church Rd. and Park Place opened up as park. I've talked to neighbors who tell me it was open to neighbors until the early 1970s. That's about 16 acres. To link up with park on the McMillan reservoir site, that is envisioned in the federal park plan, it also makes sense to protect an additional 5-8 acres along Irving St. This would also allow people living and working on the new Soldier's Home development to have access to park both over here on Park Place and down around the McMillan Reservoir area.

I also think that means that we as neighbors need to work ontrying to convince our federal and District representatives that THEY need to take case of veterans AND other residents. Some park can be expected as part of development because it enhances the value of development. But if we care about the Home and it's finances, I think we also have to try to work to get the federal or District government to give the home something for some park land. I also think we have to work on getting the home a better financing mechanism. This 19th century trust fund seems like a disaster for the Home and for north central DC. I know I've been trying to work on this. So have others.

If you want to help on this let Bill, or I know. There's plenty to do.

[Jason]

First, I am not that Jason. Second, I heard the show and agree with Randy and Andrew. I've never been impressed with Jonetta, but I found her dismissal of the neighborhood arguments particuarly irritating (historic preservation + ecological impact + smart growth conerns = NIMBYism?!?!). You know, just because Donald Rumsfeld made another shortsighted, ill-informed decision (refusing to increase the deduction that funds AFRH), that doesn't mean that all the massive, irreversible mistakes that would logically follow from it are inevitable. Good job getting the arguments out there, Reyn.

[AJS]

I thought Reyn did a great job. They definitely ganged up on her; it's too bad there wasn't someone else on our side to even things out.

Reyn stated the important reasons why the Soldiers Home property should be preserved. Is that NIMBYism? I don't think so -- not every neighborhood has a jewel like the Soldiers Home, and most people in the area -- or the country -- don't even know about it. The fact that neighborhood people have taken an interest in helping on this issue is in large part driven by the fact they're among the very few who know what's even going on. This is an additional reason to end the AFRH's secrecy on this issue.

As for the allegedly local guy who said he supports pouring concrete on the meadow, maybe he does support it. Some people don't plan to stay in the neighborhood -- they've bought places here because they want to flip them.

I've heard people say they think more condos will increase the value of their own places. I think that's mistaken as a matter of economics, because a surplus drives down value -- it does not drive it up.

[Andrew]

You're right, they did seem to gang up on Reyn. And they too readily embraced the cheap shot of "NIMBYism" instead of trying to really examine the issues. Reyn did quite a good job -- I doubt that most of us would have maintained our composure as well as she did. Finally, I think the caller named Jason did us a real disservice by essentially claiming (inaccurately, based on my extensive involvement in this issue since early 2005) that the community opposes any development at AFRH. Most residents I've heard from take a much more nuanced approach. And if Jason's experience is limited to one civic association -- which was my impression "reading between the lines" -- it would have been much fairer of him to emphasize that. He played right into the hands of the radio hosts, who were looking to be able to pigeonhole this issues as simply NIMBY...

[Randy]

Felt a bit like a gang up on Reyn. I also felt my comments were fairly unproductive as I never got up a full head of steam. Sorry I let the neighborhood down as I had tried to continue on regarding Congresswoman Norton as well as my development analysis that the residential component of the neighborhood will ruin the neighborhood. Also, I really felt that the use of NIMBYism was both dismissive and irresponsible by the panel. It simply is not a matter of Nimbyism, it is just a bad development plan. Reyn deserved more respect and kudos for beating the drum of "how much money do they need?".

If anything, it made me angrier at the polarized responses to this development. I feel that everyone want very similar things, responsible development. If we cannot come to a unified voice as a neighborhood, then we wil certainly continue to be left farther and farther behind. I plan on getting very involved.

Look forward to additional comments.

Randy