Talk:McMillan Sand Filtration Site

"Park"?
Since when is this a park? Everything official I've ever seen calls this the "McMillan Reservoir Sand Filtration Site" and it has never been used as a park. —D. Monack talk 22:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I've now rewritten the article and changed the name to remove references to this site as a park. —D. Monack talk 00:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The US Congress called it a park. 108.51.141.104 (talk) 05:31, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

If you read the article you will see the full citation and timeline for calling it a Park. "In 1906, Secretary of War William Howard Taft designated the site part of the McMillan Reservoir Park, a memorial to Senator James McMillan (R-Michigan), for his work as chairman of the Senate Commission on the Improvement of the Park System and his efforts in shaping the development of the city at the turn of the 19th century. After Taft became U.S. President, Congress officially designated the site as a park in March 1911.[4]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.141.104 (talk) 05:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

"McMillan Park Reservoir Park and Fountain (WA 86): The reservoir site and the filtration plant were included in the park system proposed by the McMillan Commission Plan of 1902, and in 1906 the site was designated McMillan Park. ln 1907, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. was hired to design the park within the grounds of the waterworks facility. The underground filter beds were covered with topsoil to form an extensive flat lawn, while the linear courts were planted with allees-of cork trees to either side of the sand bins, sand washers and regulator houses which aligned the central axis of the courts. Hawthorn trees were planted along the perimeter of the site. At the southern end of the filtration site at its escarpment, Olmsted designed an active park with recreation space crowned at its height by the McMillan Fountain, sited with vìews south to the U.S. Capitol. For the reservoir side of the site, Olmsted encircled the basin with winding drives and walking paths with views of and across the water" http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/feature/places/pdfs/13000022.pdf 108.51.141.104 (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Not all neighborhood residents oppose the development of the Filtration plant.
The last line of the article says that residents have started a petition opposing the development of the Filtration Plant. That's pretty misleading, since there are plenty of people in the neighborhood who DO support the development, especially the latest plan released in 2013.

It's a big enough issue that it showed up as one of "Neighborhood Beefs of the Year" list.

The article is also pretty misleading about the current "use" of the Filtration Plant. The US government fenced it off in the early 1940's.(still has prominent no trespassing signs). Even the "Friends of McMillan Park" group admits that this piece of land has been CLOSED to the public since World War II.

I feel like it's fair to mention that people haven't been able to access this green space for 70+ years! The development plan is actually a viable option to turn the closed off space INTO a park. The article doesn't mention that either.

All these people who are complaining that development is destroying a "park" - were they even alive when it WAS a park?

All I'm saying is that I think the article is rather one-sided with respect to the development of the Filtration Plant. Not all residents oppose it!! I own a home 1/2 mile away and I think development is a great idea! It's a beautiful space and it will create jobs and we badly need a grocery store. - 209.249.76.12 (talk) 22:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Mariana

The article clearly states that Park was fenced off and fell into disrepair. We can all agree that most people nearby weren't around before WWII, so most people weren't alive when it was a park. However, this post is about derelict park that is under significant pressure from developers and from the residents nearby. The larger issue is about what to call, how to describe, and how to develop and maintain this park. A park which was built well before any of us were alive. I agree that "DC residents have also launched a petition drive to ask the city to reject the VMP plan and consider alternative proposals." is slightly misleading. Perhaps you could commit a better way to describe it? 108.51.141.104 (talk) 05:41, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on McMillan Sand Filtration Site. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090228232317/http://dcpreservation.org:80/endangered/2000/mcmillan.html to http://www.dcpreservation.org/endangered/2000/mcmillan.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on McMillan Sand Filtration Site. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226045246/http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep870-1-67/toc.htm to http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep870-1-67/toc.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:22, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on McMillan Sand Filtration Site. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101012205425/http://www.dcpreservation.org/endangered/2005/mcmillan.html to http://www.dcpreservation.org/endangered/2005/mcmillan.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Article Title
Does the article need to be officially retitled to "Reservoir District". While most people dislike the new name, including me, I believe it's official. LemonPumpkin (talk) 14:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)