For many years, residents have asked that a library be included as part of the redevelopment of the McMillan Slow Sand Filtration Plant — aka McMillan Park, 26 acres of city-owned land, at North Capitol Street and Michigan Avenue, across from Children’s Hospital and the Washington Hospital Center.

On Tuesday, the DC Council extended by five years the time to complete the land disposition transfer of ownership to developer Vision McMillan Partners (VMP).

The plans proposed by VMP do not include any library, even though a library was included in the Office of Planning 2002 report of recommendations from the McMillan community planning process. In  2011, a library was highlighted as part of the redevelopment by then-Ward 5 Council member Harry Thomas, Jr.  And the location meets the DC Public Library criteria for siting of a new branch.

A library is a desirable amenity for any development, an economic generator and traffic builder that appeals to all generations and caters to residents from all walks of life. Libraries bridge the digital divide. They foster diversity with collections, programming, and activities for the least educated and the most. They provide safe space and space for civic engagement, as well as meeting rooms, classrooms, rooms with a view (the soon-to-open roof terrace at the new Woodridge Library).

The fact that something as positive (and publicly funded) as a library was omitted from the VMP plans, leads to the question,”What else is wrong?” LRP’s experience with the West End Library land sale makes us suspicious of the city’s land deals, which so often amount to giveaways.

It comes as no surprise to us then that DC Auditor Kathy Patterson recently identified the lack of a competitive bidding process in the selection of VMP as McMillan’s developer, contrary to best practices. Auditor Patterson laid this out in a letter to Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, wherein she also suggested that a rebid of the project was in order.

The five year extension just granted allows time to put funding for a library at McMillan into the capital budget of the DC Public Library system. However, granting the extension also indicates that the city does not think time is of the essence. Therefore, the Council could rescind the disposition deal – the land sale as yet unconsummated by developer VMP– and have it put out for rebid as the Auditor recommends.

A library would be a great thing for McMillan and should be required, but it will not solve the problems inherent in this deal.

In spite of a messy day of sleet last Tuesday, about 60 people showed up to DCPL’s Meet and Greet for architects from Mecanoo and Martinez + Johnson, who have been chosen to renovate MLK memorial library.

Lead architect Mecanoo’s Francine Houben at first appeared a bit bewildered by the apparent lack of a formal program. However, after a brief introduction by new Library Executive Director Richard Gavilon, she gamely and quickly went through the same slide presentation again from some weeks ago. When she was finished, one perplexed gentleman called out in dismay, “Where are the new plans?”

Considering that it had been a month since the architects were selected, it was not unreasonable for him to think that something additional would be presented. Alas, his question went unanswered as there would be no Q & A. We were assured that it was preferable to talk one-on-one with the architects instead.

As we were dispersed to “light refreshments” of cookies and water, there was grumbling at this well known tactic to keep information from being shared. One wonders, too, what these world class architects must have thought about the sheer inefficiency of answering the same questions over and over for each individual.

In the end, a degree of efficiency triumphed, as it will when a group of humans are left to their own devices. A small crowd gradually gathered around Francine over at the model display (across the Great Hall from the cookies), which she dismantled and put back together as needed to answer various questions. By then some had left in frustration, but those who stayed received a small measure of personal interaction with this charming Dutch genius.

This video highlights the public engagement process in Roxbury Boston, on an historic preservation and revitaliztion project there, headed by Ms. Houben.  Video from Boston Project

If you haven’t yet decided on your choice for mayor, perhaps a look at our brief four-question survey of candidates will help you choose.

Not all candidates responded: Jack Evans refused, and Tommy Wells’ office repeatedly said they would get right back with us, but after several weeks did not.

Mayor Vincent Gray also did not return a survey but his office said we did not give them enough time, so we apologize. Fortunately, we know where the Mayor stands regarding MLK since his 5-year capital budget proposed $100M for MLK renovation in 2017 & 18 based on the understanding that a public-private partnership would fill the funding gap, projected by the DCPL staff to be between $125M and $150M, for a total of $225-250M needed.

An October 2013 report to DC Council from DCPL, in response to the Budget Support Act, said:

“The budget approved by City Council for fiscal year 2014 includes capital funding for renovation and redevelopment of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Library: $3 million in FY14 and $50 million in FY17 and FY18 for a total of $103 million. This assumes multiple floors with at least an equal amount of financing from a private developer.”

Here’s what other candidates provided:

lrp_survey_carlos_allen

lrp_survey_muriel_bowser

lrp_survey_reta_lewis

lrp_survey_vincent_orange

lrp_survey_andy_shallal

At the Library Oversight Hearing on February 19, DC Council Education Committee Chair David Catania attempted to get a fix on how much it will cost to renovate the MLK Library. It wasn’t easy to get a straight answer.

Just four days earlier, at the first and only citywide public forum where three competing designs for the renovation of MLK were presented, DCPL’s  facilitator stressed that the design forum was “about choosing an architect, not a design.” Yet, at the oversight hearing, DCPL’s Director of Capital Projects Jeff Bonvechio explained that he couldn’t provide an answer to Catania’s question because DCPL is still “in the process of costing out the winning design.”  In spite of these  contradictory statements by DCPL representatives, the Committee Chair pursued his question.

DCPL’s Bonvechio said further that cost estimates from 2012 were $250 million, $103m of which has been allocated by the Mayor (in fiscal years 2017 and 18).

Noting the $150m shortfall, Catania asked how the additional money would be found. Bonvechio responded, “The way to bridge that gap is by bringing on a development partner.”

The Chair asked what the sale of air rights to a developer would raise. The number turns out to be $40m, only, leaving a gap of more than $100m.

Catania appeared impatient, “You seem to be pretty far down the track having selected an architect, having selected a plan. Yet, you don’t have the money in place.”

He asked how the gap would be filled. The options, according to Bonvechio, are “additional city funding or from a deep pocketed donor.” With that, Catania abandoned the line of questioning.

###

It is the pursuit of a mythical developer or deep pocketed donor that has kept DCPL from doing the planning needed to cultivate multiple donors, possible sponsors of naming rights, or other public/public partnerships such as the DC Archives (with $42m attached to it in the capital budget for a new building).

Moreover, the $40m projected sale of MLK air rights would have to be for all of the air rights over MLK (8 stories or more), not just the three additional stories of the newly selected library design. In the West End, more land and full air rights (minus a one story library and firehouse) were swapped for only $20m (to be paid for in construction). Why would a smaller amount over MLK bring in more?

Financial planning demands that we know exactly what is for sale over MLK. No one has defined it. If we don’t know that, how do we know how much can be raised from the proposed sale of air rights being contemplated?

However, what is most important to us, at Library Renaissance Project, is do the people of the District of Columbia want to sell the air rights over their central library? That is their call, and should be the first question answered before any financial planning or building design development.

September 4, 2013
For IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Robin Diener
202 431-9254

DC Library Renaissance Project Seeks Rehearing “En Banc”of Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Zoning Commission’s Approval of West End Library and Fire Station Development

Case Will Decide Whether Taxpayers Lose Tens of Millions of Dollars in Property Value to Private Developer, and Whether District’s New Affordable Housing Legislation Will Be Gutted

WASHINGTON, DC – The District of Columbia Library Renaissance Project/ West End Library Advisory Group (“DCLRP”) has filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals’ August 8, 2013 opinion affirming a Zoning Commission order approving a Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) application submitted by EastBanc-W.D.C. Partners, LLC, for the redevelopment of public property currently housing the West End Public Library, West End Fire Station and a police station.

DCLRP filed its petition on August 22, 2013. The petition requests that the full Court of Appeals grant rehearing based on fundamental errors in the August 8, 2013 opinion entered by a three-judge panel. The immediate effect of the petition is to render the panel opinion non-final, until the full Court rules on the petition.

“We’re asking the full Court to decide this case because taxpayers are losing tens of millions of dollars in property value, which the Zoning Commission erroneously disregarded, and because the Zoning Commission violated the mandatory terms of the District’s new Inclusionary Zoning regulations, by waiving EastBanc’s obligation to include a small number of affordable housing units in its PUD,” said DCLRP attorney Oliver Hall.

“The panel failed to cite any legitimate authority for the Zoning Commission’s decision to waive EastBanc’s obligations under the Inclusionary Zoning regulations, but relied instead on vague language from a Zoning Commission order to override the express terms of the regulations,” Hall said. “If this decision is permitted to stand, it will gut the District’s new affordable housing legislation, before it ever has a chance to be enforced.”

Due to the nature of the issues raised, the decision rendered will impact the outcome of so-called “public-private partnerships” throughout the District. At stake is whether District taxpayers will receive adequate compensation for tens of millions of dollars in public property value conveyed to private developers in such deals. That value will be lost forever, unless the full Court of Appeals recognizes that the Zoning Commission erred by disregarding it.

The case is D.C. Library Renaissance Project/West End Library Advisory Group v. D.C. Zoning Commission, No. 12-AA-1183.

DLCRP’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc in the West End case is available here:  Petition for Rehearing En Banc-1