Advisory Neighborhood
Commission 6B
Minutes of Regular
ANC Meeting
May 13, 2008
Commissioners
Present: Ken Jarboe, Vice-Chair;
Commissioners Absent: Julie Olson, and Mary Wright
The Vice Chairperson Ken Jarboe chaired the meeting and the Commissioners introduced themselves.
There was a quorum for conducting business.
Adoption of Agenda
1. Adoption
of Agenda
2. Community
Speakout
3. Community
and Commission Announcements
4. Presentations
·
Update on WASA’s Long Term Control Plan to
control combined sewer overflow – Ms. Aleizha Batson, WASA Office of Public
Affairs and Mr. Rick Ponti, WASA CSO Consultant
·
Neighborhood Pace Car Program – Traffic Calming
Program – Dorcas Adkins; Director Education Programs,
·
Neighborhood Street Trees and Tree Watering
Campaign – Liz Tylander, Urban Forestry Administration
·
5. Planning
and Zoning Committee
·
HPA # XX-XXX,
·
BZA # 17782, 903 North Carolina Avenue, SE –
Special exception to construct a two-story rear addition to existing one-family
row house not meeting lot occupancy, open court, and nonconforming structure
·
HPA # 08-285,
·
HPA # 08-280,
·
DDOT’s response to the 17th Street,
SE & Potomac Avenue, SE, intersection traffic problem – Pat Taylor
6. ABC
Committee
·
Expenditure of funds to hire counsel for Pacific
Café Protest
7. Eastern
Market Committee Report
8. Approval
of Commission Minutes
9. Adjournment
The Vice Chair announced that the Neighborhood Street Trees and
Tree Watering Campaign will be deleted from the agenda. The Vice Chair also pointed out that
There were no objections and the amended agenda was approved.
Community Speakout
Mr. Sing who lives at
Mr. Sing stated that VHI is the worst offender collects behind Barracks Row and other establishments in the area. They are collecting trash between the hours of 3:45 and 6:45 a.m. twice a week. VHI still has not done anything about addressing this issue. The police department and DCRA stated they will attempt to cite the offenders. There are both civil and criminal citations that are possible. Mr. Sing does not have a progress report yet from the police department whether they have issued any citations or not. Mr. Sing suggested to the Commission that any voluntary agreements in the future have included in them that provision prohibiting overnight trash removal. The other offender is Enviro Solutions which is a big conglomerate consisting of BFI, ETW, and PSI and they will switch off as to which company will come out and pickup the trash on certain days.
Commissioner Jarboe asked Mr. Sing if he has been in contact with the people at 1D1 about this problem. Mr. Sing stated he had and in fact had spoken with Lt. Prader.
Commissioner Oldenburg stated that she also had been in
contact with Lt. Prater about this situation as well as the same type of
problem across the other side of
The Vice Chair asked Commissioner Oldenburg to be the point person on this issue.
Commissioner Garrison suggested that the Commission does make it part of its procedures to ask establishments about the trash pickup, which is part of their voluntary agreements. Additionally constituents should complain to the authorities so there is a record of these type violations, which can be considered with license renewals are reviewed.
The Vice Chair suggested that if he or anyone else knows of specific cases where the Commission can go directly to the merchant to address this issue, therefore he encouraged all constituents to let the Commission be aware of these situations and the Commission will initiate corrective action.
Another constituent commented that BFI consistently picks up at Eastern Market prior to 6:00 am 6 days a week. Mr. Sing added that the regulations stipulates that trash cannot be pickup between the hours of 9:00 pm and 7:00 am and cannot be within 300 feet of a resident in this entire area.
Mr. Vernon Mallu who lives at
The Vice Chair informed Mr. Mallu that this location is in
Commission Wright’s SMD and she is aware of the situation and part of the
problem is Parks and Recreation is suppose to be policing the back area, but
they are not. The Vice Chair assured Mr.
Mallu that the Commission will speak with Park and Recreation, BID, and EMCAC
about Eastern Market and the 600 block of
Ms. Yoonmee Chang who lives in the 500 block of
Commissioner Jarboe responded that the last ANC meeting the Commission devoted a most of the time discussing this issue with representatives from DDOT and DPW present.
Mr. Justin Luk who lives at
Commissioner Jarboe stated the Commission would put in a call to have them removed, but it would be better if he did so. Commissioner Jarboe suggested that he call 311 and put in a service request for the trees to be removed and to make sure he get’s the tracking number for his request or he could go on-line to www.dc.gov and put in a service request there. Additionally, if he put his request in online and is already a part of their system, he will be able to track the progress of his service request on-line.
Mr. Luk then asked if the same was true for getting work done on sidewalks.
Commissioner Jarboe responded that would be a little different because that is a regular scheduled maintenance program, however if his request is for fixing a pothole then he could use the same procedures as with the tree removal issue.
Community and
Commission Announcements
Commissioner Jarboe announced that the DC Department of
Insurance, Securities and Banking is putting on a series of public forums on
foreclosure and anyone interested in hearing about Subprime Lending and
Mortgage Default Prevention should plan to attend. The first will be held on Saturday, May 17,
2008, in Ward 7 from 11:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. and will be held at the
A representative from the Capitol Hill Restoration Society
announced there will be Preservation Café at which Judith Capen will return for
the second session of CHRS’s spring series on Making the Most of Your Basement
to focus on questions and issues related to digging out your basement. The Café will be held Wednesday, May 21st,
from 6:30 – 7:15 p.m., in the downstairs Community Room at Ebenezer’s
Coffeehouse at 2nd and
Commissioner Jarboe announced that Harris Teeter, which is
located in our community at
Commissioner Jarboe reminded everyone that the location the
Commission holds its meetings is in this beautiful structure
Presentations
Update on WASA’s Long Term Control Plan to control combined sewer overflow – Ms. Aleizha
Batson, WASA Office
of Public Affairs and Mr. Rick Ponti, and
Lisa Bass WASA CSO Consultants
Mr. Ponti stated the project is planned for completion by 2025 and consist of 3 parts; the Southern Section under the Blue Plains Tunnel area, Central Section under the Anacostia River Tunnel Section, and the Northeast Boundary Section. The main purpose of the WASA Long Term Control Plan (LTCP) is for controlling combined sewer overflows (CSOs) in the District. The LTCP projects that WASA is in the process of implementing are intended to improve water quality improvements and in providing much needed relief to areas of the District that experience flooding, erosion, and other related problems. A major element of this effort includes exploratory drilling soil borings, some of which are planned to start over the next few months.
Depending on the scheduling and permitting, boring in ANC 6B, primarily along the river and RFK Stadium is expected to begin sometime in June and will take 1-2 weeks to complete. After the soil borings ground water monitoring will be placed inside the bored holes.
Mr. Ponti reviewed several maps illustrating the work that had been completed and the types of soil that was founded in the various locations, and the potential tunnel alignment based upon what they know thus far. The tunnels are approximately 23 feet in diameter and extending approximately 13 miles in total in the southern end of the Blue Plains treatment plant up to the northeast corridor. The soil boring project takes approximately one week to do each hole and they drill down approximately 200 feet.
Commissioner Jarboe inquired about the area by RFK and Reservation 13, especially north of there where a lot of that land is filled, in that there has been a great deal of concern about the potential of the heavy metals and other toxics in that landfill, and he wanted to know if the borings would show what’s there and secondly, will the boring or tunneling disturb any of those materials. If so, how would they keep that from happening?
Mr. Ponti responded that all the samples they obtain they have the ability to test for a whole suite of constituents and they have been doing this up to this point in the process and will continue to do so. Regarding the dept of the fill in the area he is not exactly sure what it is, but the design of the invert of the tunnel is designed to stay way below any fill materials so that they could avoid any massive disturbances. Commissioner Jarboe asked if he was correct in that they did not have any surface disturbances as they are doing the tunnels. Mr. Ponti responded that he was correct except for the shafts. Additionally, anything found in the fill material will have to be contained, isolated, and environmentally tested and that is DCRA, Department of Environment and Department of Water Quality. They have very strict mandates on soil boring and on investigations. If you are in a potentially, not even a know hazard, but even in a potentially contaminated zone any contractor before they can go out and load a load of dirt into a dump truck, samples must go to the labs so that they can know exactly what in the ground so the determination can be made as to where the soil must be disposed of either in hazardous waste site or normal dumping location. In the two areas where know fill was located, they expected to find the fill material down about 20 feet, but they have found it to be only 7 to 8 feet deep and everything else look relatively undisturbed. In the environmental testing they have done thus far they have been pleased to find that everything is coming up clean as a whistle.
Commissioner Garrison asked if the design is such that parts of the project can be completed and usable prior to the 2025 completion date.
Mr. Ponti responded that Commissioner Garrison was correct in that portions of the project will be completed and usable prior to the 2025 date. The Blue Plains tunnel will start at Popular Point in 2012 and go down to Wood Plains and he believes that is on a 4 year construction sequence and the same time they will also start mining the Anacostia River tunnel, so at the same approximate timeframe 2016 or 2018 about 2/3 of the project should be online, which is within the WASA, EPA, and the District of Columbia Consent Decree that has set target dates that must be met to meet the mandates of the Decree.
Mr. Ponti provided the Commissioners and community with a packet of information, which contain a map of the projected tunnels, a Community Comment Form and a sheet of Frequently Asked Questions about the CSO Tunnel Project.
Neighborhood Pace Car
Program – Traffic Calming Program – Dorcas Adkins; Director, Education
Programs,
Ms. Adkins stated the Washington Area Bicyclist Association
is the group that is administering the program, which is supported by the DC
Department of Transportation in response to all the pedestrian fatalities of
last both this year and last. The
program was started last year in Ward 3 as a pilot. Ms. Adkins stated Councilmember Tommy Wells
in very supportive of the program for implementation in Ward 6 and will be
kicking off the program next Friday on the Bike to Work Day at
The general idea is to doing traffic calming around schools and is based upon getting drivers to drive within the speed limit. A person struck at 40 mph has a 90% chance of dying and a person struck at 25 mph has a 90% chance of surviving. The have offered the program to 14 elementary schools in Ward 6 and they have had tremendous response from 11 of them to participate.
Ms. Adkins provided the Commissioners and the community with a packet of information, which described the program in more detail and included a sticker to be placed on the vehicle asking people to drive the posted 25 mph speed limit in the city’s neighborhoods.
Neighborhood Street
Trees and Tree Watering Campaign – Liz Tylander, Urban Forestry Administration
Presentation postponed until a later date.
Ms. Garner who lives at 145 E Street, SE, stated the Yu Ying
Charter School is currently located in Ward 5 in a temporary space in Brady
Hall, which is located at
Ms. Garner stated in order to get the word out about their
schools they have utilized The Hill Rag, District Section of the Washington
Post, radio talk shows, The Northwest Current and the Asian Fortune News. The name Yu Ying was selected for the school
because it meaning nurturing excellence.
They are inspired by a famous school established in the early 20th
Century in
The school operates on a 10 month calendar of September 2, 2008 through June 24, 2008, with 2 months summer vacation, and starting in January 2009 there will be a 1 month language camp. In the their 4th year, 2011, they expect to have 250 students enrolled.
They are currently looking for 70,000 square feet of space to house the school and would prefer to own their own building.
Ms. Garner provided the Commissioners and community with a packet of information that provided an overview of Yu Ying Public Charter School and invited everyone to come and visit the school.
Planning and
Zoning Committee
The Vice Chair turned the meeting over to Commissioner Campbell the Chair of the Planning and Zoning Committee to make their report.
HPA # XX-XXX, 903
North Carolina Avenue, SE – Two-story rear addition to existing one-family row
house
Additionally this is also a BZA case of…….
BZA # 17782, 903 North Carolina Avenue SE – Special exception to construct a two-story rear addition to existing one-family row house not meeting lot occupancy, open court, and nonconforming structure
The property is a single-family row house dwelling in a R4 zone with a lot occupancy of 67.1% (1259.9 SF) which the owner wants to increase to 69% (1295 SF, an increase of 1.9%). The applicant wants to decrease the rear yard setback from 49.5ft. to 42.1ft. The owner is applying for a Special Exception to the lot occupancy, open court and nonconforming structure regulations.
The applicant states that the property qualifies for special exception under 11 DCMR, Section 223 because the lot occupancy is under 70% and that the addition will not adversely affect the use or enjoyment of any adjacent or abutting property (11 DCMR 223.2). The property is not in conformance with Section 403.2 (60% lot occupancy) & Section 406.1 (open court). This is a result of a 1.5ft easement along the west property line.
The applicant sites DCMR 223.1:
“An
addition to a one-family dwelling or flat in those Residence District where a
flat is permitted that does not comply with all of the applicable area
requirements of section 401, 403, 405 and 2001.3 shall be permitted as a
special exception if approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment under section
3104, subject to the provisions of this section.
Section 223.2 The addition shall not have a substantially adverse affect on the use or enjoyment of any abutting or adjacent dwelling or property, in particular the air, light or privacy of others.”
The applicant has submitted numerous letters of support from
adjacent and affected neighbors with one exception -- the property at
The proposed build out, though visible from the alley, will not be visible from any street. In the alley, the existing garages at and adjacent to the property will limit the visibility of the addition.
Owing to the applicant’s submissions, reference to applicable DCMR code, and letters of support from affected property owners the Committee has no reservations in recommending this project for approval to the full ANC. The Committee has no objection to the design of the addition, from a historic preservation perspective. The Committee also recommends that the ANC would have no objection to the HPO portion of this case being taken up on the HPRB consent calendar.
The Vice Chair asked the applicant if there was any additional information pertaining to the case. The response was no. The Vice Chair asked if the open court was because of both the easement and the dogleg on the other side. The applicant responded that he was correct.
The Vice Chair stated this comes as a motion from the Planning and Zoning Committee needing no second, all those in favor to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous 8-0.
D.D.O.T.’s response
to the
.
Pat Taylor, resident, is asking for ANC support of a May 6, 2008
petition for relief from traffic problems sited by residents at the corner of
17th and
This submission references a petition previously submitted
to DDOT. In their response (DDOT) they state that no explicit solution by the
petitioners was stated. But in their opinion “Option 2 is what they
desired.” “namely that in restoring
the lane configuration along 17th Street to its 2004 configuration ,
that the designated left turn lanes would be removed from both southbound and
northbound 17th at the Potomac Ave. intersection. This is the option
desired by petitioners. We ask that the ANC 6B endorse this option”
In reviewing the submitted documents and in further discussion by the Committee with Mr. Derrick Hardy from DDOT, and Ms. Taylor, a number of suggestions were made. One, to reverse the flow of traffic from West to East to East to West on “G” Street SE to allow traffic to access Kentucky Ave. SE, which would help eliminate or reduce the use of the alleys between G and H streets as a pass-through, a “defacto” access to Kentucky Avenue, which is also a safety concern.
Additionally, the changes
by eliminating the Left Turn on 17th St Southbound and make
it a straight-through and keeping the right lane as a Right Turn only onto
Potomac Ave, would help reduce the safety concerns regarding speeding on
The Committee also suggested that Commissioner Michael Patterson be approached to Chair/organize a community meeting with the “G” street residents to communicate the need for the changes and the benefits to the residents in the area.
The Committee will defer further discussion on this matter until Commissioner Patterson can be contacted.
The Vice Chair stated it is his understanding that the issue
is the changing of
HPA # 08-285,
The owner of the property at
After reviewing the plans and material to be used in the renovation, the lack of a site plan, the lack of written input from the neighbors regarding the renovation, photographs of the rear of the property and being this would be the only time the Commission will have an opportunity to adequately evaluate the project, the Vice Chair stated the case would be deferred until next month. This delay will allow the applicant to secure the necessary information and appear before the Planning and Zoning Committee to resolve any issues.
HPA # 08-280, 715
East Capitol Street, SE – Rear renovation and new two-story addition with
basement
The owner Linda Gallagher is proposing the installation of an elevator and a 2-story addition in the rear with a basement. Mrs. Gallagher has lived in the property for 27 years and since she and her husband are getting up in age, they would like to install the elevator to make their home more livable for them.
Ms. Gallagher stated she has met with CHRS to review her plans and they have expressed objections to the launching of the dogleg. Ms. Gallagher stated that the brick in the area is so deteriorated that moisture in coming through and causing mold to be on the interior. Additionally, the only thing the public will be able to see about their renovation is that about 2/3 of the way back will be a two-story brick addition, which will look very nice and will not be as high as main house. Therefore, the historic nature (façade) of the property will not be altered and the addition will be 3 ft. lower than the roofline of the main house. The windows will be the same as what is currently installed. The rear addition will not be visible from the street. Mrs. Gallagher has conferred with her neighbors (both sides, back and front) and provided the Commission with several letters of support from them for her project.
The architect, Ms. Caren Yglesias, reviewed the detail
drawings with the Commissioners and discussed 3 specific points; the character
of the street, what they were proposing that will be seen from public space (
Ms. Yglesias stated they are asking to change the front door with an 8 lb. door, which is not appropriate with the typical Capitol Hill type door, and to change the wrought iron gate from a fixed panel and a hinged panel to a pair so that access to the side yard is improved because there is no alley access to the house. The magnolia tree in the rear will be removed and the swimming pool will be filled in with the grinded up bricks from the renovation.
Ms. Shana Holmes who is on the Historic Restoration Committee of CHRS stated the 3 biggest issues they will be dealing with are; the closing off of the side yard, which they believe are significant features that contribute to the historic character of a house on Capitol Hill’s Historic District; the demolition of approximately 28% of the existing historic building; and the window in the rear that Anne Brockett layout.
After discussing the pros and cons of the case Commissioner Glick made the motion to support the application. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Patterson.
The Vice Chair asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0-0).
Eastern Market
Committee
Eastern Market Committee report 5-13-08 by Commissioner Jarboe
EMCAC voted to keep
Construction contract for interior of South Hall has been awarded and approved by City Council – first construction meeting was Monday
RFP for market manager is in the last stages of clearance
ABC Committee
Expenditure of funds
to hire counsel for Pacific Café Protest
The Vice Chair reminder everyone that the Commission is in official protest with Pacific Café over both their renewal of license and for a proposed entertainment endorsement, which does not mean that discussions are not still going on, but the Commission has a formal protest date of July 9, 2008. The discussion at the Executive Committee meeting was that the ANC needs to hire an outside counsel to be able to represent the Commission at that protest hearing and also to prepare anything that maybe necessary to continue discussions with the applicant. The Vice Chair stated the Executive Committee asked the Chair to look into the matter and his communications with the Chair is that she has been talking with a number of people, but has not yet identified the particular attorney that will take the case on. However, the Chair is recommending, based upon her conversation with me, that the ANC authorize up to $5,000.00 for legal counsel and the details of the legal counsel would be worked out prior to entering into any agreement with the Executive Committee. Thus, the Vice Chair made the motion to authorize the expenditure of $5,000.00 to retain legal counsel to represent the ANC in the protest hearing before ABRA. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell.
Commissioner Glick asked for discussion on the motion.
Commissioner Glick mentioned that previously he had a
protest against S&J Liquor Store at 15th and
The Vice Chair stated Commissioner Glick’s friendly-amendment is not accepted as such. Commissioner Glick then made the motion that ANC6B authorize more than $1,000.00 to match all money donated from the community. There was no second, therefore the motion failed.
The Vice Chair offered new amendment that the ANC is authorized to spend up to $2,500.00 for an attorney based upon a match from the neighbors.
Commissioner Green asked what happens if the Commission does not raise the money from the community. Would the Commission be saying that it does not feel strongly enough to pay for it ourselves? The Vice Chair stated that would be the crux of it.
Commissioner Patterson stated he objects to the expenditure of any money for an attorney, based upon this imaginary amount of what it will cost in the first place. Commissioner Patterson when on to say just because the Commission believes it has a reliable source who tells us their past experience is that it will cost about $5,000.00, he/she can not attest to what an attorney will charge for their services. Thus the actual amount can end up growing and growing depending upon the administrative process, therefore he does not think the Commission should spend any money on this matter. Commissioner Patterson added that if the Commission does decide to expend funds Commission’s money for an attorney for the abutting neighbors, the Commission should say as a maximum the amount is $1,000.00 and only matching what the community (neighbors) would be spending for their own interest.
The Vice Chair stated that since his amendment was not seconded he was withdrawing his amendment.
The Vice Chair stated when the Commission sets a limit it is in fact a limit and will not grow beyond that without a vote by the Commission.
Commissioner Campbell stated the motion to spend up to $5,000.00 was made and seconded and the fact that times have changes. Whereas, 3 or 4 years ago it cost for the assistance of an attorney would cost $2,500.00, but this is 2008 and attorneys do charge more for their services. If the Commission is lucky enough to find an attorney that is willing to undertake this case pro-bono well and good, but Commission is only allocating spending up to $5,000.00. Thus any additionally monies would have to come from the residents of the protest area and anyone else who is willing to contribute.
Commissioner Oldenburg stated that voting for this amount of up to $5,000.00 does not precludes the Commission from also working with the neighbors to asked them to come forward to help fund the cost of the attorney for this case, which would lower the Commission’s eventual expenditure.
Commissioner Garrison asked if his recollection that if the Commission takes action tonight the action would have the effect of not providing resources either directly from the Commission’s budget or from someone else’s resources, and there was not attorney available the protest would still continue. Additionally, the Commission would be in a situation where it would need to represent ourselves without an attorney present. Therefore, based upon his understanding the Commission’s potential of prevailing on the protest would be substantially diminished if the Commission was not represented by counsel who was familiar with the intercedes of that process. The Vice Chair responded that he was correct.
Commissioner Garrison then stated that if the Commission take an action that would undercut the Commission’s ability to be successful in the protest and since the Commission was the ones who brought the protest, and is not independent raised, but is a decision by the Commission to advance this matter. Commissioner Garrison then asked if in the future the Commission takes a protest forward the Commission will have to pay for an attorney if the Commission decides to fund this one. The Vice Chair responded that it would be judged on a case-by-case basis. Commissioner Garrison continued by saying that he finds it odd that the Commission finds itself in this peculiar situation where the Commission has to finance the hiring of an attorney.
The Vice Chair commented he agreed with Commissioner Campbell in that times have changed and the Commission is in a situation where the bureaucracy is such and the decisions at the ABC Board are such that if Commission wants to prevail we will need to go in with fully qualified representation. The ABC Board has always been on the sides of the establishments in the past. He and other Commissioners have appear before the ABC Board to represent cases, but when the Commission does go in, we are usually outnumbered. The times the Commission has been successful it has gotten the Corporation Counsel, which is now the Attorney General’s Office, to come in a represent the Commission. And even is some of those cases the Corporation Counsel has not done the best job of putting our case together. The times when ANCs have been most successful is when they have put the money up and gone out and secured qualified legal counsel in the specific area, which does not guarantee success but it does increase our odds of success. The Vice Chair added that it is his understanding that the Office of ANCs is attempting to hire an attorney so that there is specific representation bought for ANCs available through their office because the Attorney General Office does not seem to want to take on these types of cases.
Commissioner Campbell called for question. The Vice Chair asked all in favor of calling for question to say aye. The vote was 5 to 3.
The Vice Chair stated that the motion is to spend up to $5,000.00 under the control of the Executive Committee for an attorney in the protest. The Vice Chair then asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was 4 to 4. Thus the motion failed.
Commissioner Campbell made a motion for unanimous consent to put an additional item on the agenda regarding allocation of funds to hire an attorney to represent the Commission in the Pacific Café Protest. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Glick. Commissioner Patterson objected.
Amendment to 2nd
Quarter Budget
Commissioner Green reported there was a miner mistake in 2nd Quarter Report that was submitted to the auditors, therefore she following up with an amendment and a letter to explaining the error. Commissioner Green stated the mistake was that the interest from February was not included in the report, however our staff assistant penciled in the corrected amount on the report prior to it being submitted. The interest amount reported was $23.10 and it should be $36.40, which is a difference of $13.30. Commission Green made the motion to accept the amended report. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell.
The Vice Chair asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0-0).
Adjournment
There was no further business and Commissioner Hill made the motion that the meeting be adjourned until its next meeting date of June 10, 2008. The motion was seconded, and the vote was 8 to 0.
Meeting Adjourned.
Prepared by Bert Randolph
Attested: