By David Kosub (Contributor)

Remnants of an earthen fortification exists right in Riggs Park’s backyard. Constructed from the surrounding ground, it helped protect the District of Columbia from invasion from from Confederate soldiers during the Civil War. Oh, how times have changed.

When going through the neighborhood today, we may not even give it a second thought. We may now only think of the area surrounding Fort Totten as a main transportation hub, an urban forest, and an open field adjacent to South Dakota Ave NE. But, could it be something more? 

Originally known as the Fort Circle Parks, the Civil War Defenses of Washington (CWDW) (of which Fort Totten is a part) are a unique National Park System (NPS) asset located very close to home. In 2004, NPS released a plan to manage and preserve the circle of forts, with a particular focus to “preserve significant natural features, including substantial acreage of mature native hardwood forest, geologic and aquatic resources, and a diversity of important habitat for indigenous flora and fauna that are unusual in an urban setting and that contribute to the uniqueness of the nation’s capital.” In addition to natural preservation, it also called for enhancing knowledge on the forts’ cultural significance to the Civil War and encouraging recreation.

Let’s work as a community now to finally achieve these 15-year old goals for our slice of the CWDW. Following the enactment of the public lands package of bills earlier this spring, the District of Columbia and NPS can now enter into agreements to maintain and operate NPS properties in the District. See this post here for more.

With assistance from the office of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), I  recently spoke with NPS about this issue, with a focus on reactivating the parcel of CWDW parkland bounded by Galloway Street, South Dakota Avenue, and Gallatin Street NE. Generally speaking, they appear willing to help, but we must work within the framework on the CWDW management plan. For instance, this area is zoned as “recreation” meaning open green space must be preserved, and “organized and informal recreational activities will be the primary use.” Thus, picnicking, pick-up games, community events, and the like are allowable, but things like playgrounds and water features which distract from the historical nature are not.

So, how would you like to use this space? Add your thoughts to the comments section or send me an email here. I’ll synthesize the ideas and share back in a follow-up post.

As a start, NPS threw out the following suggestions. They previously approved a multi-purpose trail to be installed, but this will be a timely and costly endeavor, one for which funds are not available. They could reinstall and enhance the picnic area with new tables, trash cans, grills, roof features, and even a composting toilet. However, they noted that the community has raised concerns previously related to potentially nefarious and illicit activities when picnic tables used to be there (see this caught on camera footage).

Programming with NPS events is possible too. The 2004 plan calls for the activity center at Fort Dupont to be transformed into a center educating the community on the cultural history and natural resources within the CWDW. This center, according to the plan, will help “schools within walking distance of the fort sites to use these areas as local outdoor classrooms  for cultural and environmental education.” Perhaps our local schools and library educational activities could benefit from this?  

Wayfinding signage would be great to help passersby know more about this national park. Such signage could explain the landscape and its historical importance. The plan also indicates that “signs, site furniture, and interpretive materials [were to be purchased] as a way to make the [CWDW[ more visible.” When we spoke, NPS appeared amenable to this idea as the 2004 plan talks about how markers are helpful to create a consistent interpretation of the cultural significance of the CWDW.

I also would love to see more trees around the perimeter of the site. That said, I recognize the call for maintaining the character of the large swath of open space in the 2004 plan, but trees provide many tangible benefits to a community that I feel they cannot be overlooked. NPS was hesitant about planting more trees around the perimeter, but they did not completely shut the door on the idea.

Finally, the plan does recognize the “need for visitors to be safe while in the parks. NPS indicated the design for a paved trail between Galloway and Gallatin is underway and will share information upon its completion. Congresswoman Norton is also aware of this community concern (see here).

We have a great opportunity as a community to engage with this space. The Parks Main Street (on whose Board I serve), aims to revitalize the Riggs Park small business corridor. This could be facilitated through creating historical markers, hosting promotional events, and securing resources to beautify the visual character of the nearby parkland adjacent to the neighborhood. Perhaps since the Lamond-Riggs Citizens Association approved the Community Benefits Agreement with EYA for the Fort Totten South project this past June, we could use future promised “funding [as noted in the agreement] to complete improvements or upgrades . . . following [in-kind design services and a minimum of three visioning sessions . . . [for the] activation of Fort Circle Park.” (Read more on this agreement here). Maybe ANC 5A could invite NPS to an upcoming meeting to hear directly from the community on this issue (building on Congresswoman Norton’s offer a couple weeks back to help bring NPS here for a community discussion). Call me a dreamer, but maybe all three could combine forces on this too. Either way, your ideas are welcomed in the comments section below or via email to me directly.