Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B

Minutes of Regular ANC Meeting

November 13, 2007

Commissioners Present: Will Hill, Neil Glick, Julie Olson , Ken Jarboe, Mary Wright, Dave Garrison, Carol Green, and Executive Director, Bert Randolph. Commissioner Campbell joined the meeting shortly after it started.

Commissioners Absent:

Chairperson Julie Olson chaired the meeting and the Commissioners introduced themselves.

There was a quorum for conducting business.

Adoption of Agenda

The Chair asked if there were any modifications needing to be made to the agenda. Commissioner Garrison stated that 612 E Street, SE needs to be deleted from the agenda. Commissioner Jarboe stated that 326 D Street, SE also needs to be deleted since it was only an informal presentation to the P&Z Committee.

Commissioner Hill made the motion that the agenda be adopted as amended. Commissioner Wright seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-0).

Special Election

The Chair announced that a special election would be conducted to fill the vacant position of SMD 6B09, formally held by Commissioner Russell. The Chair stated that each candidate would be allowed a maximum of 3 minutes to speak to why they want to be the ANC Commissioner and what they can do for their constituents.

The Chair announced that there were four candidates for the position, but Zachary Toczynski had withdrawn from the election. The remaining candidates are Timothy Strecker, Michael O. Patterson, and Phyllis Johnson.

Each candidate discussed their reasoning for wanting to be elected as Commissioner and what they expected to accomplish.

The Chair explained that the voting would begin at 7:15 p.m. and close at 8:15 p.m. Gottlieb Simon the Executive Director of the Office of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, and Peter Waldron will be supervising and overseeing the election process. The Chair announced that at the conclusion of the voting process the winner of the election will be announced once the ballots are counted, which will occur prior to the ending of tonight’s meeting. The Chair then stated that Councilmember Tommy Wells was planning to attend the meeting and could potentially swear-in the new Commissioner.

The Chair declared the voting open.

Community Speakout

Mr. Chris Herman presented the Commissioners and the community with a handout that illustrated some of the issues he had with the proposed 11^th Street Bridge Project. Mr. Herman cited six points: 1. For Capitol Hill, the “promise” was west-side traffic reduction; the “reality” is no benefit/more traffic. 2. For Capitol Hill, the major issue is increased “river-crossing traffic” on local streets due mainly to the “orange” bridge (local bridge). 3. East side residents are taking a very hard look, too, at the orange bridge. They too are concerned it means more commuter traffic across their neighborhood. 4. DDOT tossed the “freeway-to-freeway-only” alternative without public input. The project cost has skyrocketed to $645 million. 6. Part of a billion dollar, largely commuter-oriented program. How does it all fit together?

Community and Commission Announcements

The Chair announced that ANC 6B also has a vacancy in SMD 6B04. Currently petitions are being finalized for this position and baring any unforeseen problems, at the next regularly scheduled meeting on December 11^th, the Commission will be holding an election to fill the seat for Commissioner for SMD 6B04.

Presentations

2008 Wirefly National Marathon – Greater Washington Sports Alliance – Keith Dowling, Race Director

Mr. Dowling introduced Ms. Diane Romo Thomas, the Director of Community Relations. Mr. Dowling announced that the 3^rd annual race will be held on Saturday, March 29, 2008. The race will start and end at RFK Stadium beginning at 7:00 a.m. with the last runner finishing at approximately 10:30 a.m. Participants will park at RFK, which will eliminate the need of participants to park in neighborhood parking spaces. The course runs down East Capitol Street from the stadium and through the city and return to stadium using East Capitol Street. Mr. Dowling stated that they are expecting 7,000 participants in the race and all participants will have met race qualification timings, which are designed to allow them to better control the timing (length of time) of the race. Mr. Dowling stated that they selected a Saturday to hold the race, which they have in the past, in an effort to not disrupt church services in the area.

Mr. Dowling stated that this year they have made significant changes to the race route based upon input from various groups. First, they reversed the route so that by 9:00 a.m. the northern half of the city will be cleared. The second change is the deletion of a number of streets that were used last year. This means that Pennsylvania Avenue, M Street and the Navy Yard are not on the race route this year. They have not submitted their traffic plan to MPD yet, but will be doing so in the near future.

Ms. Thomas announced that in collaboration with the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation they are kicking off the JUMMP (Junior Monumental Milers Program) for youth between the ages of 8 and 13. Participants will be asked to run or walk outside or inside weather permitting as a physical education program to challenge the youth to do the 26 miles between December 2007 and March 2008. Participants will receive awards and gift bags for their accomplishments.

Commissioner Garrison stated that he believes these type of events are very beneficial, but he is concerned about the decisions that have been made regarding routing. Commissioner Garrison asked if the route just west of the Monument will go all the way past the 14^th Street Bridge, which would mean that that area would be closed thus preventing people in the northern part of the city from going south of the city and vise versa during the duration of the race? Mr. Dowling responded that he was correct, but people would be able to travel north on 14^th Street after 9:00 a.m. Commissioner Garrison continued by expressing his concerns based upon the fact that the last two races held in the city completely shutdown everything for hours and he does not want that to happen with this race.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that he was also having a problem understanding the race routing plan because it appears to him that East Capitol Street would be shut down for most of the day, from 8:00 a.m. to past 1:00 p.m., and that was simply unacceptable. Commissioner Jarboe continued by stating that East Capitol Street is a major thoroughfare and it simply cannot be shut down for that period of time. Additionally, it would completely disrupt Eastern Market business and create absolute chaos in the area especially when you look at bus traffic along 8^th Street. Closing down East Capitol Street on a Saturday would mean that all traffic would be prevented from moving north or south of that point for the duration of the race, which is totally unacceptable.

Commissioner Garrison asked if Sunday would not be a less disruptive day to hold the race, even after taking into consideration the church issue.

Mr. Dowling responded that in reviewing past race input it has been shown that Sunday mornings have been the most disruptive of days generating the most negative feedback.

Commissioner Garrison stated that based upon this route plan, anyone who lives north of East Capitol Street who has to go someplace south will be stuck until the race is over.

The Chair asked Mr. Dowling if she was correct that they made the decision to have the race on a Saturday was due to the amount of negative response to having the race on a Sunday?

Mr. Chris Browne, Director of Sports Initiatives and Business Development, stated that based upon past experiences they realized that to minimize potential disruptions it would be better to hold the race as early as possible during the day and not on Sunday, thus their decision to conduct the race on Saturday. Therefore, they were present to get the input of the Commission and the community regarding the currently proposed route. Mr. Browne then stated that over the past two years they have been able to maintain their race timelines, which included after race cleanups, resulting in a minimum of disruption along the race route.

Commissioner Glick stated that in addition to travelers being blocked from using East Capitol Street the side streets will also be congested due to people trying to avoid the congestion as a result of the closure of East Capitol Street, which would not be fair to his constituents or other citizens in the area.

Mr. Browne responded that he understands the point Commissioners Glick, Garrison and Jarboe were making. The reason they were appearing before the Commission tonight was to get Commission and neighborhood input on their proposed route. Mr. Browne then stated that ithe Commission should look at this as the first attempt as establishing the route and allow them to work with the Commission, community, and MP special operations division to develop a more acceptable route to all involved.

The Chair asked if there was anyway to keep East Capitol Street open until the runners reach each point?

Mr. Browne responded that was the general idea related to specific timing of street closing.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that that was an excellent idea, but the real problem was that the runners will be going down East Capitol Street twice (traveling out and returning), which could mean that people would be on East Capitol Street for most of the race. Commissioner Jarboe followed up by saying that he was willing to wait and see if things could be worked out that would be more acceptable to everyone, but at this time he was not willing to support the race as it is currently routed.

Mr. Browne stated that they understood what the critical point was and that he did not think they would be able to resolve it at the meeting, but he was looking forward to meeting again with the Commissioners to see if they could workout a more agreeable route plan.

The Chair suggested that the 5 Commissioners who would be affected by the proposed route setup a time to meet with the race officials to better define an acceptable race route because she does not believe the current route would be supported.

DDOT Final Environmental Impact Study – 11^th Street Bridges – Kathleen Penny, Deputy Chief Engineer

Ms. Penny stated that wanted to provide the Commissioners and community with some data pertaining to their Final Environmental Impact Study regarding the 11^th Street Bridges Project. Ms. Penny stated that the 45-day comment period will end on November 20^th and that they were still accepting formal comments regarding the project. The next phase of the project will be Record of Decision. Ms. Penny stated that this project has been underway for a little over 18 months. The purpose of their presentation is to address three items about which the Commission had expressed concerns: first, the continuity of the freeway; second, the number of lanes on the bridge; and thirdly, questions that have surfaced over the past 6 months about what the improvement on the 11^th Street Bridge and the adjacent interchanges means for the streets on Capitol Hill, in particular Hill East.

Ms. Penny’s team discussed the following data items:

· Existing Conditions – Freeway Cross Sections

· Proposed Conditions – Freeway Cross Section and Local Cross Section

· Year 2030 Forecast 24-hour Volumes* 11^th Street Bridges Preferred Alternative – Distribution on River Crossings

· Year 2030 Forecast 24-hour Volumes on Key Regional Approaches*

· Year 2030 Forecast 24-hour Volumes*

· Changes in Year 2030 24-hour Volumes**

· Year 2030 Forecast AM Peak Hour Volumes*

· Changes in Year 2030 Forecast AM Peak Hour Volumes**

· Year 2030 Forecast PM Peak Hour Volumes*

· Changes in Year 2030 PM Peak Hour Volumes**

* Volumes taken from 11^th Street EIS Modeling

** Percent increase/decrease between No Build and Preferred Alternative – Volumes taken from 11^th Street EIS Modeling

After hearing the presentation, Commissioner Jarboe stated that, in response to the preliminary EIS, the ANC sent a letter of support/concern with two questions. The first was what would be the impact on the traffic on Capitol Hill streets. The second was that there needs to be some traffic calming measures that need to happen on 11^th Street, which needs to happen regardless of what happens to this project. Commissioner Jarboe went on to say that this was in part due to fact that 11^th Street passes through a school zone between Pennsylvania Avenue and the freeway and DDOT is mandated to do traffic calming around school zones.

Commissioner Jarboe then mentioned that DDOT had not included East Capitol Street in the study but did have the East Capitol Street Bridge. He is concerned about the number of people who would be coming into his neighborhood. Additionally, Commissioner Jarboe reviewed with the presenters the potential impact of traffic on 11^th, 17^th, 18^th, and 19^th Streets, Potomac Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, and Barney Circle during both the AM and PM traffic flows.

Commissioner Campbell also asked for and received clarification regarding AM and PM traffic flow on Kentucky Avenue and C Street.

The Chair interrupted to announce that the voting for 6B09 was closed and the ballots would be tabulated and the winner announced later in the meeting.

Commissioner Garrison asked DDOT if the a difference of 100 cars one way or the other in the projections was within the margin of error? The DDOT team responded that he was correct. Commissioner Garrison then asked to what extent the model includes assumptions about the various development schemes that are planned for south of the freeway along the Anacostia River? The presenter responded that as part of the regionalized development plan the model did take those considerations into account.

Commissioner Jarboe asked if he was correct that alternative plan they were proposing would have a new interchange on both sides of the Anacostia River. Are they putting in not only an interchange on the Anacostia side to go north tied to the Anacostia Freeway, as well as a new interchange that allows local traffic to get onto the Southeast Freeway heading west? Ms. Penny responded that he was correct and currently there already is an on-ramp there now. Commissioner Jarboe asked if, rather than either going to the illegal ramp (Barney Circle) or going down to the 3^rd Street ramp, the point of the proposal was to create an option to get on the freeway to get to Virginia> The team responded that he was correct and that the same was true in the reverse direction as well. Commissioner Jarboe then asked if any of the data showed the extent to which the new interchange was creating alternatives versus just a substitute for the 3^rd Street ramp? In other words, would the plan just create new volume there because of the new link or would it transfer people who would be using the 3^rd Street ramp on to this new interchange? Ms. Penny responded that he was correct because even though the volume on 11^th Street is growing, it is because of the traffic generated from of Capitol Hill and not new traffic from there.

Commissioner Garrison then asked if it was DDOT’s position that on balance this approach will not increase traffic on the Hill and in some cases may decrease it? Ms. Penny responded that by and large the plan will be decrease traffic and provide a means by which a huge number of vehicles that are currently using Potomac Avenue, 17^th, 18^th to cut-through to East Capitol Street in the P.M. traffic rush to instead stay on the freeway system. The A.M. rush will have the ability to use Benning Road, East Capitol, and even Pennsylvania Avenue to a lesser degree which means the vehicles will thus stay on the freeway system and off of local streets.

Commissioner Jarboe then asked about the non-existing data point about traffic on the Susa Bridge in that they are projecting a decrease compared to existing traffic. Ms. Penny responded that he was correct. Commissioner Jarboe followed up by asking what was in their model that would generate this type of results. Ms. Penny responded that their model included East Capitol Street, 11 Street Bridges and Pennsylvania Avenue and is a subset of a larger, regional model that goes all the way out to Maryland and the Anacostia Freeway. Thus, when they are looking at all those river crossings together, they are drawing more traffic to the 11^th Street Bridges, allowing traffic to stay on the freeways, and allowing the traffic growth that happens between now and 2030 to remain on the freeways rather than on the neighborhood streets.

Commissioner Jarboe then asked why this could be true in both the build and no-build models because in the no-build they would not be drawing more traffic to the 11^th Street Bridge. Commissioner Garrison ask if it was correct that in the no-build model they would be assuming that all the other traffic improvement projects would occur and only this (11^th Street Bridges) would not. The response was that he was correct.

Commissioner Glick stated that the Commission has asked over the years for several traffic calming studies to be conducted in his SMD without any success and he is concerned that DDOT already has the necessary data to indicate that the various traffic stop signs would be justified using their numbers. Therefore he would like to know why DDOT can not use this data to make the numerous requested traffic stop installations in his neighborhood. Ms. Penny responded that Commissioner Glick was correct that this was a legitimate beef. When the city makes these major investments in data and analysis of the sort involved in the planning for the 11^th Street bridge project, it does allow the city to do a better overall job of addressing micro issues. Ms. Penny when on to say that doing a traffic model of this complexity and breath is something DDOT has never done before, even back when the department planned for the freeway. Having access to this new data will permit some secondary studies although it will not resolve all the local traffic problems. However, DDOT has learned much more about the whole traffic grid and traffic network in this section of the city, particularly in Hill East. The improved data provides the department with better information to be able to address others issues on Capitol Hill regarding traffic issues in a more effective way.

Commissioner Campbell stated that one thing he believes that they missed is that St. Coletta’s is now in operation at 19^th and Independence Avenue and this requires an additional traffic calming measure. In speaking with DDOT over the past few weeks, he has stressed that whole area between Potomac Avenue and Independence Avenue is a school zone and traffic is supposed to be limited to 10 miles per hour in school zones. Therefore he wanted to know how traffic flows would be effected with the presence of a 10 mph speed limit in the area of St. Coletta’s on Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to after 6:00 p.m.? Ms. Penny stated that they are constantly new situations often arise in each community that will eventually change traffic flows. What they hope to accomplish by presenting their model is to give the community enough information to be able to predict what will happen if changes occur. Ms. Penny said they want to be careful not to say that in the year 2030 the traffic volume will be a specific number on that particular street because, as they have pointed out, there are things that arise that cannot be forecast that could impact volumes.

Ms. Penny stated that they are working on putting together a public hearing for Wards 6 and 7 where they will bring together all of the public agencies (DDOT, DCOP, Deputy Mayor Office, DCWASA, and PEPCO), and developers in an attempt to provide as broad of an overview as possible regarding all of the traffic discussions that are taking place. The focus would be on the area abutting the Anacostia River, providing the city to illustrate how agencies are coordinating their plans, and how things are meshing together. Such sessions would provide the community an opportunity to come in and get a better understanding of what is happening to traffic in the area.

Chris Herman stated that the DDOT discussion is about connecting the freeways, but the real discussion should be about the potential negative impact on local streets on both sides of the river when the bridges are actually completed. Therefore, he recommended that DDOT also do a freeway-to-freeway alternative to allow residents the opportunity to compare the two concepts before going forward. Additionally, Mr. Herman is of the opinion that DDOT omitted the inclusion of many large scale projects that are going forward on the Anacostia Corridor, projects which were not included in the mobility data analysis, and thus the plan’s budget is problematic. Mr. Herman concluded by saying that the EIS states that there are no differences, no changes in traffic north of Pennsylvania Avenue, but in their presentation tonight they have given everyone information on all of the changes on traffic north of Pennsylvania Avenue as a result of the project. Additionally, the Capitol Hill Traffic Study contradicts many of the findings they just presented to everyone. Therefore, he suggested that they go back and look at the Capitol Hill Study and prepare a comparison of the two and then tell the community which one is correct.

Ms. Perry stated that, based upon the public meetings and ANC meetings, the mission was to accommodate pedestrian and transit traffic on the bridges. The only way to accomplish this was to provide auxiliary lanes in addition to what is currently there now. Therefore, if they merely replace the bridge as is, there would be no accommodation for pedestrians or possible transit on the bridge. Additionally, DDOT believes the connections between the two local areas and the ability to take local trips between Capitol Hill to Anacostia will be an important aspect of bridging the economic divide between the two sides of the river. Regarding the completeness of their data, most of the major building projects slated for the area are included in their model.

Several neighbors spoke in favor of the 11^th Street Bridges project as it related to their quality of life and safety.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that building the bridges will not be result in a huge decrease in traffic, but rather changes of approximately 10% up to a maximum of 15% in some places, so a lot of other things will need to be done. So, this will not solve the traffic problems on the Hill. He would like to see the Commission push DDOT to consider some alternatives to see how traffic can really be reduced and not just focus on the freeway impact. Commissioner Jarboe continued by stating that Mr. Herman was correct in his comments. For those who are interested, you can go on-line at the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments, and review a draft of the Transportation Improvement Program for the District of Columbia. As submitted to MCOG, the project will cost $645 Million, which is higher than what was presented tonight. Additionally, he would like to know exactly how much they are talking about in terms of build verses the no-build because at some point this bridge has got to be replaced, due to the structural deficiencies (Category 4). Commissioner Jarboe commented that he likes the idea of including a local bridge as part of the plan. He does not see anything in the data that indicates that it will produce more traffic in the neighborhoods. The idea of segregating the pedestrian and bike traffic from the freeway and the possibility of putting a rail car on it really appeals to him. Additionally, it is his understanding that CHRS has hired a consultant to do an analysis of the EIS. However, it will not be available until the end of the week.

Commissioner Jarboe then made the motion that based upon the information presented today, the Commission support the preferred alternative with the condition that traffic calming actions take place on 11^th Street and other Hill East hot spots as necessary. Additionally, he moved that the Commission ask DDOT to prepare creditable plans for the overall reduction of traffic on Capitol Hill. Commissioner Jarboe added that the real mission is to reduce the cut-through traffic in the neighborhoods and the Commission wants DDOT to look at other alternatives for dealing with this situation.

Commissioner Garrison stated that he would second the motion and wanted to make sure the Commission was clear in its message to DDOT about our desire to have some attention paid to the traffic calming issues and paid now and not just when the bridge is build.

Commissioner Campbell asked if the Commission could make the recommendations for calming studies to include 17^th, 18^th, and 19^th Streets, Potomac Avenue, to East Capitol Street, and Kentucky to C Street and other hot spots previously identified by ANC 6B? Commissioner Jarboe responded that he would be happy to accept that has a friendly amendment.

The Chair announced that there is a motion that has been seconded. The Chair then asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0). The motion passed.

The Chair made the motion to change the order of the agenda by moving the results of the Special Election to before the Eastern Market Committee position. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jarboe and approved unanimously (8-0).

Mr. Gottlieb Simon, Executive Director of the Office of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions announced that Mr. Michael O. Patterson was the winner of the Special Election.

The Chair then made a motion for the support of a resolution regarding the filling of the vacancy in 6B09, which read as follows:

November 13, 2007

The Board of Elections and Ethics informed ANC 6B that only four candidates who qualified to fill the vacancy in SMD 6B09 were Phyllis Johnson, Michael O. Patterson, Timothy Strecker, and Zachary Toczynski;

The Commission therefore conducted an election on November 13, 2007, at the Old Naval Hospital, 921 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE;

The winner of the election was Michael O. Patterson.

Resolved, therefore, that ANC 6B request the Board of Elections and Ethics declare the vacancy filled by Michael O. Patterson by publication in the District of Columbia Register; and

Resolved further; that copies of this resolution be sent to the Council, the Mayor, and Michael O. Patterson.

The Chair stated that the resolution comes as a motion from the Chair. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell and approved unanimously (8-0).

The Chair then informed Mr. Patterson that Councilmember Tommy Wells was present and would have the honor of swearing him into office. Councilmember Wells performed the swearing ceremony for Mr. Patterson and welcomed him as a Commissioner of ANC 6B. Commissioner Patterson was invited to join the other Commissioners at the table as the newly elected Commissioner of 6B09.

Resolution Supporting Survey of Historic Resources within the ANC Boundaries

Commissioners Green and Hill offered the following resolution to the Commissions for their consideration and support:

Whereas, ANC 6B recognizes the importance of understanding our neighborhood’s history both inside and outside the historic district and is eager to support the effort of those neighbors interested in researching Hill East’s development history;

Whereas, ANC 6B understands that formal survey of historic resources is the method used to research the development history of a neighborhood in a systematic and complete manner;

Whereas, ANC 6B understands that once complete, the survey results can be put to a number of good uses, such as providing information on building type and architecture to inform construction projects for those wishing to renovate or restore their homes; and providing information on architects, builders, and past occupants for neighborhood walking tours (as has already been developed for Barney Circle), call box projects, or brochures on neighborhood history and architecture;

Be it therefore resolved that:

ANC 6B supports the survey of historic resources in all areas throughout its borders.

Commissioner Glick made the motion that the Commission supports the Resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hill.

Commissioner Garrison asked for clarification as to exactly what the purpose of the resolution?

Commissioner Green responded that it was to provide information on building type and architecture to inform construction projects for those wishing to renovate or restore their homes; and providing information on architects, builders, and past occupants for neighborhood walking tours (as has already been developed for Barney Circle), call box projects, or brochures on neighborhood history and architecture.

Commissioner Garrison then asked who has to agree to have the survey done.

Commissioner Jarboe responded that the resolution would go to Historic Preservation, to our ANC, and would be general in nature. Commissioner Jarboe continued by saying that the resolution would allow the sponsors to obtain a grant to perform this survey because they would now have the neighborhood support for the activity. Therefore, this is being put forward by a group of residents who will go out and do the survey, raise the funds to do the survey, and then the community will have the survey results for all of the various purposes, including going to HPO, the ANC and other agencies. Commissioner Jarboe added that in order for them to go out and raise the money they wanted to show that somebody cares about this action.

Commissioner Garrison then asked if this was a precursor to the area becoming a part of the Historic District.

Commissioner Jarboe responded that it could be, but it is not necessarily so because it has value independent of our area on Capitol Hill. Commissioner Jarboe added that the support is for all ANC boundaries and not just ANC 6B.

The Chair asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

Planning and Zoning Committee

The Chair turned the meeting over to Commissioner Campbell, Chair of the Planning and Zoning Committee.

HPA #07-267, 522 7^th St. SE, - Mormon Church project

Presenting, Kevin Shearer; LZM Architects and Bishop Scott Parker, Church of Latter Day Saints

This applicant is familiar to the Committee as they presented on June 12, 2007, to discuss the teardown of the old “Safeway building” now the site of the Church of Latter Day Saints. Additionally, the applicant plans the building of a new church in the same footprint. The Commission asked the applicant at the June 12^th meeting to rethink the design plans for the new church building and to meet further with nearby neighbors for their input.

The applicant has redeveloped the submissions to include a building that reflects more the aspects of the historic district. The present building is approximately 7,000sq. ft. and the proposed structure would be 9,585sq.ft. Parking will again be underground with a total of 19 parking spaces (17 and 2 HDC dedicated). The applicant will need a variance for parking as they are required to provide 20 spaces total and can only provide 19. The applicant did appear before CHRS on November 5, 2007. The applicant has also met with HPRB and the ANC to address issues of concern regarding design, structure and placement of various aspects of the proposed building and the Committee appreciates this well thought out alternative to their original proposal. The Committee has no reservations in recommending this project for approval to the full ANC.

The Chair asked if there was any new information from the applicants. Mr. Shearer responded that there was not. The Chair then asked if there was any new information from the community regarding this application. There was none.

Commissioner Jarboe asked Commissioner Campbell if he was correct in that while the P&Z Committee mentions that the applicant will need a variance, this action does not support the variance. Commissioner Campbell responded that he was correct and the applicant will have to come back to the Commission to present a request for a variance as well as for any public space issues.

Commissioner Garrison stated that at the P&Z meeting Mr. Shearer was asked how his discussions went with Capitol Hill Restoration Society, and he stated that CHRS generally supported his changes. Mr. Garrison said he has now seen the CHRS recommendations and wanted to ask him a few questions.

Commissioner Garrison stated that the CHRS notes raised the issue of the steeple not being centered on the main block, restudying some aspects of the steeple as to whether or not there was a better alternative, landscaping, and the dumpster placement. Commissioner Garrison asked Mr. Shearer if he had addressed those issues since he met with CHRS.

Mr. Shearer stated that he has been in discussions with CHRS regarding several of the issues. Regarding the dumpster, the issue was the amount of access available in the alleyway. He does not see any alternative for placing the dumpster. Mr. Shearer added that they believe, preliminarily, that they will be able to access the dumpster from the alley, but he is not totally sure at this point. Regarding the steeple, he believes they have done the best design by making the complete structure look as if it was part of the community. Regarding the height of the steeple, in further discussions with HPRB the applicant will continue to study the steeple and windows to make sure they are in keeping with Capitol Hill. The general design of the steeple in the proposal is the way the church would like to approach it, but further refining of the details of the steeple’s exact proportions will be developed in the next several months as they go forward with close collaborations with HPRB and CHRS. Regarding the landscaping for the building Commissioner Campbell stated that during the P&Z Committee meeting Mr. Shearer informed them that CHRS and HPRB had asked them to pull the entire building forward about 3 feet into the public space area. This was a concern and it is understood that the applicant will probably have to come back before the Commission to get public space approval for this action since the landscaping would be on public space. Mr. Shearer stated that Commissioner Campbell was correct and one of the reasons they have not adjusted the plan to move the building forward is because he wants to verify that it is even possible for them to do so before making that change.

Commissioner Garrison stated that he is glad to note that the applicant has been and continues to be responsive to the issues raised by the ANC, CHRS and the neighbors.

Commissioner Jarboe urged Mr. Shearer that, as he continues his work on the steeple, he try to keep it in the vocabulary of the other steeples on Capitol Hill. His current design seems to be in keeping with the other steeples on Capitol Hill, but it needs to be verified.

The Chair stated that this was a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Committee it needs no motion or second. The Chair then asked all in favor of the recommendation to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

HPA #07-4236, 1223 Pennsylvania Avenue SE – Rear addition (100% lot occupancy)

Marc Ardejani, the owner, presented. Once again Mr. Ardejani appeared before the Committee to present his plans to make a rear addition to the current structure resulting in 100% lot occupancy. Questions arise as to whether the applicant can build without a rear exit from the proposed building. There were also questions regarding utility right-of-way/access. Mr. Ardejani was unable to satisfactorily answer questions as to the reason for a new “STOP WORK” order recently placed on the project at the front of the property. Additional there were concerns as to whether or not his adjacent neighbors had been notified of his plans and the potential impact of the proposed building to their properties. At this time there are still numerous concerns and unanswered questions regarding this project, thus the Committee does not feel that there is sufficient information to render an informed recommendation.

Commissioner Campbell stated that one of the issues at the P&Z meeting was the need for a rear exit from the building. He subsequently researched DC Code (Chapter 14, Section 1404 (6) re: construction). Commissioner Campbell stated it was his interpretation that the code addresses the ned for adequate egress from the property which means that the lack of a rear exit in this application is a problem. Additionally, if the building is to have 10 or more employees they will be required to have a fire escape for the building.

Commissioner Garrison discussed the extent to which the proposal would extend the building to the rear of the property. He wanted to know what it would mean to have egress from the back of the building when what you are exiting to is a narrow alleyway where there is literally no room to maneuver.

Commissioner Campbell responded that the applicant was proposing to build out to 100 % of the lot, which would bring him back to the 2 feet line and there is also the issue of utility access at the rear of the property and there is not a building behind him, but a fence instead. Thus, because of the fencing and the utility access requirement that has to be maintained, the applicant would be prohibited from building to 100 % lot occupancy.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that there is an issue about needing a special exception because of the rear yard setback.  In the commercial zone where this is located where there is no alley, a 15 foot rear yard set back is required.  If there was an alley, then the set back could be on the third floor as long as it was at least 20 ft up.  But since there is no alley, Commissioner Jarboe stated that he thinks the applicant may need a special exception

The Chair asked Mr. Ardejani if he had made any changes since the Planning and Zoning meeting last week.

Mr. Aredjani responded that he wanted to make some clarifications about using 100% of the lot, because he claims he will not use 100% of the lot. Mr. Aredjani explained that due to the irregular shape of the lot it will be impossible to use 100% of the lot. Mr. Ardejani continued by saying that he checked the fire code requirements and his understanding is that the basement and first floor of a property should have two exits. Therefore, the step up (in the front of the building) is considered one and the front door is the second, which is the way it was when he purchased the property. Additionally, he stated that they have the option to put a door in the back, which he is willing to do if needed.

After looking at Mr. Aredjani’s photographs of the property in its original condition, Commissioner Campbell stated that the property had two doors in the rear; one for the first floor and one for the basement. Commissioner Campbell then stated that the applicant's submissions indicates that the two rear exits are not in the plan. Mr. Aredjani stated that he was willing to do whatever was required pertaining to installing the rear exits in the building. Commissioner Campbell responded that that was the Commission’s concern in that his plans did not show such exits in the rear. Therefore, if it is not in the plans the Commission can not support his application.

The Chair asked Mr. Ardejani what was the reason for the latest Stop Work Order he received.

Mr. Ardejani responded that he was originally informed by the HPRB that he needed to restore the porch to its original look. At the last meeting with HPRB, however, the Board approved the change in the directions of the basement steps from being perpendicular to the building to being parallel. He will be meeting tomorrow with the representative of HPRB to review what is currently being done with the steps.

The Chair asked if the adjacent neighbors have had an opportunity to review the plans regarding the potential impact on their properties.

Mr. Ardejani responded that he had not spoken with the neighbors because he was not aware that he needed to do so since it was commercial property.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that this case the rear addition is not on the HPRB calendar for their next meeting because they have stated that they do not have a problem with it but they want the Commission to weigh in on the matter. Commissioner Jarboe continued by stating that it was his opinion that the case was turning into a zoning case more than an HPRB one because of the various issues just discussed. Commissioner Jarboe then asked Mr. Ardejani if he had submitted plans to the BZA yet for the rear? Mr. Ardejani responded that he has not. Commissioner Jarboe then stated that until the BZA has commented on the plans the Commission can not move forward with this case. Therefore, it is his feeling that the Commission needs more information from the BZA before it can move forward and once those issues are resolved they can move forward with the HPRB case.

Commissioner Campbell stated that his main concerns regarding this case are the safety issues and communication with his neighbors. Commissioner Campbell then made the motion that the Commission oppose the application due to the lack of communications with the affected neighbors. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Green.

Commissioner Jarboe offered a friendly amendment to add the wording “at this time” to the motion, which will allow the Commission to revisit the case once the issues have been resolved. Commissioner accepted the amendment.

The Chair asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hand. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

HPA #08-034, 303 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE – Front façade alterations

Presenting were Rich Markus, Architect and Harvey Mendelsonn, the owner. The owner proposes to renovate the exterior of the façade to change the exterior archway to a more traditional storefront to reflect the proposed new business “Good Stuff Eatery”. The owner’s plans only show demolition of the existing façade to be replaced by the proposed storefront. The Committee recommends this project for approval to the full ANC.

The Chair asked if there was any new information on the case.

Mr. Markus responded that they had spoken with Anne Brocket at HPRB regarding the sign and she did not see a problem with it.

Commissioner Jarboe added that he had previously had a concern regarding whether some of the brick was original or not, and after visiting the site he is comfortable that façade is made from new brick.

The Chair stated this was a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Committee requiring no motion or second. The Chair then asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

BZA # 17692, 914 11^th St., SE – Variances from floor area ratio (FAR) requirement and off street parking and a special exception allowing food delivery service (Pizza delivery/carryout)

Presenting was Richard Aguglia, attorney, for the owners. There is also an amendment to the application. In the amended application the owners are including lots 814, 810 and 817 in addition to lot 809 in square 996 for relief purposes. The application is also being made for FAR, which presently is proposed to be 1.79 or .259 over the allowed 1.5, resulting in a 17% difference. Additionally, a variance from the off-street parking requirement would be necessary as the proposed parking in the rear of the building would be in tandem instead of adjacent. Lot 810 abuts lot 814, which abuts 809. Plats are included in the owners submissions indicating that lot 810 is narrow and “bordered” by brick walls on both sides, which the owner notes as the practical difficulty justifying his request for the parking variance. None of the proposed changes in the applicant’s submission suggest that the relief sought would compromise or negatively affect the Capitol Hill Comprehensive Plan or the neighborhood. The owner has included with his submission numerous signatures of support from surrounding neighbors for his project. Included with the packet were citations to the relevant code sections excerpted from the DC Code of Municipal Regulations. Owing to the nature of the relief sought and the submissions by the applicant in the packet the Committee recommends this project for approval to the full ANC.

The Chair asked if there was any new information on the case. There was none.

The Chair stated this was a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Committee requiring no motion or second. The Chair then asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

Eastern Market Committee

Commissioner Jarboe stated that the EMCAC Parking and Transportation Task Force met with Commissioner Wright representing the ANC. A number of suggestions were made to change parking around Eastern Market. There were 3 sets of suggestions. One was setting up some loading zones so that people have a place to come and drop off and pickup things at the market. The second was the possibility of reopening the C Street alley to allow traffic flow through. The third was requiring timed parking over the weekend along 7^th and 8^th Streets and some other possible places to replace the current free parking available during weekends.

Commissioner Jarboe stated that subsequently there have been a number of e-mails to the 8^th Street neighbors and there are some concerns about reopening the C Street alley. Commissioner Jarboe made the motion that the ANC support the Task Force’s recommendations without taking a position on opening C Street alley until the neighbors can be consulted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wright.

Commissioner Garrison asked if the recommendations were being presented as an approach to be taken during the period of time that remains between now and when the Eastern Market renovations are completed and is reoccupied or are these recommendations thought to be permanent?

Commissioner Jarboe responded that it is his understanding that there is a mixture of both approaches. However, he believe the one proposing to charge for parking is probably more of a permanent approach, but the others are more immediate approaches. One of the immediate issues is the fact that the Christmas season is coming. But this is intended to address immediate issues now with the idea of revisiting the issues at a later date.

The Chair asked all in favor of the motion to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

Approval of Minutes

Commissioner Garrison stated that he and others had reviewed the minutes.

Commissioner Glick make the motion approved the minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Campbell.

The Chair asked all in favor of adopting the minutes to raise their hands. The vote was unanimous (8-0).

Adjournment

There was no further business and Commissioner Hill made the motion that the meeting be adjourned until its next meeting date of December 11, 2007. The motion was seconded, and the vote was 8 to 0.

Meeting Adjourned.

Prepared by Bert Randolph

Attested: