How
the Mall Wrecked Washington
Chris Szabla
As many of the millions of tourists who visit the
capital of the United States each year can tell you, there is a massive green swath
running from the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, festooned in monuments, lined by
colossal structures, and supposedly beloved by all. But is the Mall really a good piece of
urban architecture? Is it beneficial to the city of Washington? Is it even representative
of the United States, what should be sought after in the creation of a capital city? There
are many contradictions in the shaping of the city of Washington . . . one of which is the
Mall itself.
A little history: In 1901 civic leaders in Washington, DC, decided to rebuild their city
in the styles presented by the City Beautiful. The City Beautiful was a new concept in
American urban planning that dictated that the city should not only reflect necessity and
individual grandeur but rather collective civic pride that was intended to be the driving
force in turning the city centre into a gleaming, majestic place filled with parks and
monuments, fountainnades and gardens, all intended to cross-pollinate: built on civic
pride, and intending to foster civic pride. This philosophy may still predominate in some
cases today: Central Park in New York is a much loved area that is known the world around.
At the forefront of this movement was the legendary landscape planner Frederick Law
Olmstead and his assistant, Calvert Vaux, who were instrumental in designing parks for
many cities following the City Beautiful pattern, such as Delaware Park and the parkway
system in Buffalo and Boston's Emerald Necklace park system.
In the late 18th century Pierre L'Enfant was commissioned to design a new capital city for
the United States. On the site chosen by the city's namesake, George Washington, L'Enfant
laid out a simple grid pattern for the streets and interlaced those with broad avenues
sweeping through the city. The design was modern at the time, but today it is referred to
as Baroque city planning. The same principle of broad axial avenues converging at many
squares drove the redesign of Paris by Baron Hausmann in the 19th century. L'Enfant also
planned for a grand processional, ala Les Champs-Elysées, leading westward from the
Capitol structure, intended to be the centre of the city. However, a second, more
important processional, Pennsylvania Avenue, was laid out between the Capitol and the
White House, linking the two major powers of the government.
L'Enfant's original plan (see right) provided for the same system of blocks and avenues
that persist throughout all Washington. However, by 1901, all that was realised in this
space were railroad tracks leading up to a small depot. In 1901, at the height of the City
Beautiful movement, civic-minded Washingtonians sought to transform this area into a grand
public park.
The original intention of the Mall was to provide a civic
open space for all Washingtonians to enjoy. Indeed, land was appropriated for recreational
purposes and so forth. However, as the ideals of the nation seemed to change, so did the
plans for the Mall. The American embracement of Beaux-Arts architecture and planning,
imported from Europe, made them want their cities to reflect the glorious architectural
traditions of Europe. Thusly, the Mall plan was changed to create a more ceremonious
"power corridor", moreso showing the power of the American government than
providing a public park for the people of Washington. Embracing Beaux-Arts ideals,
planners surrounded Capitol Hill with massive government structures, and lined the Mall
with overbearing "educational and cultural institutions" (which later became the
Smithsonian Institution). As a result, the Mall took on an overscaled, totalitarian
quality, with buildings outmassing it. The government structures surrounding Capitol Hill,
including the Library of Congress and the Supreme Court, which under L'Enfant's plan would
have had their respective place on ceremonious squares (reflecting Baroque ideals) were
instead shoved back behind the Capitol, out of place from the public.
The creation of the Mall also shifted the centre of the
city of Washington from the Capitol to the area west of it, forever leaving the Northeast
and Southeast sectors neglected. Today, these areas are among the worst in the city.
Meanwhile, the burgeoning Northwest and Southwest areas border the Mall, which was
supposed to be the city's centrepiece but instead turned into a counterweight. The Mall,
in combination with Rock Creek Park, Glover Archibold Park, and the C&O Canal Park,
create a continuous chain of greenspace that is unparalleled in other districts, making
Northwest far surpassant in terms of affluence to other districts. The lack of a
sufficient public park east of the Capitol is either a result of a neglect for the area
inhabited by the poorer classes or an argument that it would sever the L'Enfant plan,
which is ironic owing to the fact that the Mall, the Potomac Parks, Rock Creek Park, and
Glover Archibold Park all defy the plan.
As a consequence of the Mall's construction, what was intended to be Washington's finest
avenue was also marred. Pennsylvania Avenue, which was intended to provide a broad axial
vista between the White House and the Capitol, seems stark and lifeless compared to the
Mall below it, which provides a more horizontal axis. The immediate problem with the
horizontal axis is that Greco-Roman structures , unlike Georgian structures, are usually
look best when viewed from an angle. Indeed, the view down Pennsylvania Avenue is a
spectacular one, seeing the Capitol aligned at a 30 degree axis. However, this view would
be further accented if Pennsylvania Avenue were made a more pleasant, pedestrian area.
Imagine the view if Pennsylvania Avenue were crisscrossed by overhead elm trees and
frequented by many pedestrians. Surely it would accent the surrounding colossal government
structures of the Federal Triangle and provide for a more Champs-Elysées type effect.
The Mall's length and size also serve to block major north-south transportation routes.
Some of the worst traffic in the city is that which struggles to cross the barrier of a
greenspace. Unfortunately, the Metro subway system serves as more of a commuter rail than
an intra-city people mover, and therefore cannot be effectively used to alleviate traffic
in the area. As a consequence of the traffic, existing streets crossing the Mall are
widened or more streets are added to cross it, destroying the greenspace it seeks to
create and making it more dangerous for pedestrians to cross east to west.
Certainly not all of the 1901 plan served to mar the city of Washington. The original
plan intended for the extension of several areas in a rhombic shape, connecting 4 points
including the Capitol, White House, Jefferson Memorial, and Lincoln Memorial.
Unfortunately, the construction of freeways such as the Whitehurst and the 395 served to
sever this plan. Therefore, several of the axii planned to enhance the L'Enfant plan
rather than destroy it were never realised. Maryland Avenue, which would have extended
from the Capitol to the Jefferson Memorial, was blocked by railway tracks and the
intersection of the I-395 and 14th St. The extension of New York Ave. between the White
House and the Lincoln Memorial was blocked by the construction of massive government
structures. Pennsylvania Ave.'s vista to the White House was blocked by the United States
Treasury building, a beautiful structure, but one which sits in the wrong location.
Finally, no axial avenue was ever constructed between the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials,
instead are winding highway connector routes reminiscent of a freeway intersection spread
over a field. Therefore, tads of modern city planning can also be blamed for central
Washington's problems.
What if L'Enfant's original plan had been implemented instead of the 1901 plan to replace
the railroad tracks which originally ripped the surface of central Washington? We'd
probably see more individual squares each anchored by an individual government structure,
rather than an odd juxtaposition of structures as seen on Capitol Hill and in the Federal
Triangle. Structures such as the Supreme Court and Library of Congress, as well as the
Treasury Building and National Archives, would look far better anchoring a square at the
end of a broad avenue than stuffed with other government structures. The intermixing of
government structures and businesses/residences would also provide more life to the area
(the government areas of Washington can seem somewhat stark) and provide democratic
symbolism: that the United States government is one with the people, and not separate from
them. In cities such as London and Paris, this concept has worked very well, and, oddly,
these are the cities that proponents of the City Beautiful sought to emulate. And if
original plans to make the Mall more of a common for Washingtonians were ever realised,
perhaps one would not feel so intimidated surrounded by overbearing government structures
and the looming Capitol.
Chris Szabla is an assistant editor at
Urbanphoto. He lives in New York.