Soldiers Home update 2/1

[from Reyn A.]

There's a lot happening with respect to the AFRH development right now. We will have more news in the next couple of days about the HPRB hearing today, and also a copy of a letter from the DC Dept of Transportation that expresses grave concerns about the project.

The Commission of Fine Arts has issued a letter expressing significant concerns about the AFRH’s development plans, rejecting its current proposals and requesting that the AFRH come up with some better alternatives.  You can read the full letter here.

Some quoted highlights (note in point three the stated preference for park land in Zones B and C):

1. The Commission emphasized the singular importance of the property and [...] objected to what they characterized as a lack of a clear design concept in the master plan, commenting that it does not satisfactorily enhance the extraordinary resources of the site nor relate well to the surrounding urban context.

2. The Commission members stated numerous concerns with the proposal for Zone A… [noting that it] does little to acknowledge the urban context, including a lack of expression of the North Capitol Street axis in the proposed development […] and leaves the design intention for the new buildings ambiguous with no clear concept… [likewise] that the outer edge should be carefully designed to appropriately address the site's prominent frontage along North Capitol and Irving Streets, proposed to be lined with exposed parking structures.

3. The Commission members were dissatisfied with the proposed design for new development in Zones B and C, questioning whether the relatively small amount of proposed development would be worthwhile... If possible, the Commission encouraged the consideration of retaining these areas as park land with public access.

4. The Commission requested a revised submission of the master plan, including alternative designs for development in Zone A that explore a more coherent approach to the site.

Comments

[John King]

Thank you to Reyn, Sandy, and all the other Petworthians holding forth "our side" of the discussion over the AFRH. The comments from the CFA show good understanding of planning and aesthetics: their ability to enhance the urban fabric AND add value to proposed development.

The site has tremendous potential -- but once you plunk buildings down, they're there for 100 years. And does anyone think future generations will be thankful for the jumble of massive buildings currently planned for Zone A? (For that matter, if it's the *long-term* financial health of the AFRH at issue, maybe selling into a housing bear market is inopportune.)

I think an alternative plan could at once serve the site better and detract less from its "singular importance." A better plan would leverage the AFRH site's open space, location, and context to bring more development $$$. So orient to the North Capitol axis! Adapt the vernacular architecture! Link the McMillan Reservoir and Fort Totten Park! (Who wouldn't pay to live on that bike trail?)