By IAN THOMS
Current Staff Writer
September 10, 2008
D.C. Public Library officials and their design team last week assured residents that the new Watha T. Daniel/Shaw Neighborhood Library would exude the acclaimed translucent quality represented in early designs — that it would “glow from the inside.”
But the design team has yet to settle on an affordable material that could create the effect. The original plans had called for “channel glass” to cover most of the building and give it a translucent appearance.
“Channel glass was very, very expensive,” said Peter Cook, an architect with the design firm Davis, Brody, Bond, Aedas. “Maybe I should have said, very, very, very expensive.”
Cook said his team is looking into several materials that could replicate the effect of channel glass.
Many in the community had praised the original design. So they were dismayed in June when the design team unveiled new plans, with metal replacing much of the glass, giving the building a boxy feel that some residents equated to the old library, which closed in 2004. The new building is slated to open on the same site as its predecessor, at Rhode Island Avenue and 8th Street NW, in March 2010.
Cook said his architectural firm is determined to “bring back the translucent quality of the building.”
Despite Cook’s assurances, many attendees left Thursday’s meeting frustrated and unsatisfied. They said library officials have ignored many of their questions and complaints and shut them out of a process purportedly designed for their inclusion. The meeting was the final of five held on the project.
“We want to help you,” Robin Diener, director of the DC Library Renaissance Project, said to chief librarian Ginnie Cooper. “You promised us a model process. This is not it. ... What is the problem?”
Earlier in the meeting, a resident hit on Diener’s point, asking why library officials and the design team did not address questions that came up repeatedly prior to the meeting for instance why the latest design does not include a green roof. “When you ignore something, it really makes people angry,” the resident said.
Before any of the library officials or the design team could respond, Steve Lee, a communication consultant who acted as the meeting’s facilitator, asked the resident: “Were there things [in the design] that you liked? Yes? OK.”
Lee’s response angered many residents, who called it “patronizing” and said he and the officials were treating the audience “like children.” Once the tumult died down, Cook addressed the green roof. He said there are many ways to create a “green” building, some of which are more expensive than others.
“One of those things that are very, very expensive, relatively speaking, is a vegetative green roof,” Cook said. He added that the design team has to make choices “and one of those choices happens to deal with money.”
The design firm is seeking a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design rating of silver for the library. Several residents asked why the design team and the library officials would not fully explain the thinking behind decisions. If a green roof is too expensive, they said, officials should explain how much it would cost and how that cost relates to the overall budget, so they could understand the prioritization.
The library system did not provide a line-item budget for the project. The overall budget is $15 million, which includes the design costs. The budget for the 20,000 to 22,000-square-foot building itself is $9.5 million.
Cary Silverman, president of the Mount Vernon Square Neighborhood Association and Ward 2 Council candidate, questioned whether library officials really wanted the public’s input. He pointed out that the officials did not provide handouts with the building’s design or floor plan. Residents handed out floor plans, but Cooper dismissed them as outdated.
“I don’t understand why you guys who are on the payroll can’t give us handouts,” Silverman said. The majority of the meeting was devoted to a presentation of the design, an explanation of what makes a building “green” and how various design elements would make the library a green building.
Chris Otten, a member of the Shaw Library Study Group, chastised the presenters for yielding little time for questions. “You spoke at us for an hour and 15 minutes,” Otten said. He asked officials to hold another meeting to discuss what programs the new library will offer.
Cooper said a meeting specifically on the library’s programming would be a good idea but that it should be held closer to the opening. “It will be too late then,” Otten said, pointing out that the building’s design could influence plans for the programs.
The meeting ended without the scheduling of a follow-up. Cooper and others stressed that the design process is finished. “The building that you see tonight is the building that we’re going to build,” she said.
Original Source is a PDF from the Current Paper staff