Initial Look at Bruce-Monroe Interim Use Proposal

Last night’s meeting on the interim use of the Bruce-Monroe site displayed an initial proposal based on community comment from previous meetings. While not complete, it provides a good peek at what will likely come to pass later this year for the 3 acre site.

The design concept was based on a dedicated budget of $500,000 from the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. There is little hope for more money in FY10, but depending upon community needs, Councilmember Graham stated that more money might be possible in the FY11 budget.

There seems to be a tight window for this project largely because demolition will be  completed by the end of April and the community hopes the interim development will be in place by the beginning of summer. Considering that it is illegal for the City to hire a contractor without going through the RFP process, a plan needs to be agreed upon soon in order to meet the summer goal.

Rough sketch of proposed Bruce-Monroe site interim planning as of 3/31/10

Some expressed concern that spending $500,000 was a waste of money when a school needed to be built. It was pointed out that putting the money toward a new school would not be anywhere near enough to get a school project begun. Others inquired about a temporary playground and if that was possible. Again, it was pointed out that the goal of the site was for a 3-5 year use and it would be difficult to take a playground away from a community that had come to rely on it. As to any use of the site for education and placing trailers on the site, the budget for that would likely come from DPR and as such was not presented as part of the plan.

To understand why the sketch seems as sparse as it is one needs to keep in mind two things.

  1. This is a basic sketch to identify areas of use based on community input. Continued input would indicate how the green spaces could further be programmed as funds become available; and,
  2. The total budget is $500,000.

To help understand the budget’s limitations based on the sketch, the following cost estimates were shared:

  • Tennis Court: $100,000,
  • Basketball Court: $75,000,
  • Black iron fence securing the site, $200,000,
  • the remainder of the money would go toward compacting the soil and installing lighting.

There was a general opinion that there should be a less expensive fencing solution, and those options will be looked into. The plan as currently presented also includes a school bus loading and drop-off area on Irving street that would limit the ability of neighbors to park within the zone during hours of operation.

Lastly, the issue of educational programs and activities was also raised. Several people expressed concern about education and desired that associated programming and facilities issues around education be considered. It was noted that as things now stand, educational facilities or programming  are precluded by the costs of the planned courts and the fence.


Explore posts in the same categories: Community Involvement, Development, Sports leisure and entertainment

Tags: , , , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

8 Comments on “Initial Look at Bruce-Monroe Interim Use Proposal”

  1. Cliff Says:

    They need to scrap the black iron security fence from the proposal. I don’t know why this city feels the need to surround everything in some kind of fence.

    • dave Says:

      Actually, a black iron security fence is exactly what is needed. 200k is a good price for that. Anything else will just get compromised and let the riff raff in. Which will lead to more drug dealing, shooting, and killing business as usual…

  2. Cliff Says:

    Hi Dave – I do not believe that. I think when you have large “visible” open spaces they deter crime by itself. I defer to people who live directly near the sight for what they want, regardless of what I think though.

  3. DB Says:

    How about a ferris wheel?

  4. Green Space Says:

    The city (DPR in particular)likes to fence things in because they look at fences as some form of maintenance…which they are not.

    Speaking of maintenance, the Park View community really needs to push and make sure that there is maintenance plan in place for this area (who is responsible for clean-up–not only emptying cans, but picking up litter (and how often), who is going to cut the grass in the open space, etc.). DC is notorious for spending thousands (sometimes millions) of dollars on projects like this and then having no maintenance plan in place.

  5. Other Dave Says:

    I think that it would be very helpful for there to be a playground at this site. Would really benefit the community. And what kind of reasoning is it to not have a playground because it would have to be taken away in five years. That does not make sense. With that logic, why don’t we build a parking lot.

  6. Alan Says:

    Cliff, if you lived across the street from the least safe part of this parcel, as I have for the past nine years, you’d change your mind. There is an elevated, remote piece of land that’s invisible from the street and has been the location of several homicides in recent years and a shooting just last week.

    If ever a site were crying for a strong fence, it’s this one. The bullet hole right near my next door neighbor’s bedroom window is enough proof for me.

    (By the way, I agree with Other Dave and the other folks who want to see lots of community use too.)

  7. […] a revised design was presented to the community on March 31, 2010, the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) only had $500,000 to […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: