Kirsten's {Beat26} Blog

As a community we have completed the conceptual historic preservation review on the Hine Redevelopment Project. We will soon enter into the next phase: zoning. This PUD or “planned unit development” process will take as many months as did the first phase. Perhaps longer. My guiding principle has been and will continue to be that this project will affect ALL of us who live on Capitol Hill. Ultimately, what gets built on the Hine site should reflect the entire community.

Thus, if I had been entrusted with the challenging job of chairing ANC6B’s Subcommittee on Hine PUD, I would’ve gone out of my way to make sure that Resident Membership on the subcommittee could not be perceived as biased toward any one perspective and was broadly representative of the residents and businesses on the Hill.

First, if I as a Commissioner already represented nearby residents, I would’ve asked a fellow Commissioner to be Vice chair whose constituents live away from the Hine Redevelopment site to assure a wide diversity of residents were represented within the leadership on the subcommittee. Second, I would’ve selected some of the ablest, most experienced community members to serve. Third, I would’ve asked that the three ‘nearby neighbors’ groups, who have made the most noise about the project to date, select one joint representative for the 6B subcommittee. And, I would’ve found other 6B residents to serve on the subcommittee because, again, this development will affect ALL of us who live on Capitol Hill, not just the residents and businesses who abut it.

Commissioner Frishberg, who is Chair of the 6B subcommittee and whose single member district includes the Hine site and thus represents one of the nearby neighbors groups, has done it differently. He has selected Commissioner Brian Pate, whose single member district includes two of the “nearby neighbors” groups to be Vice chair. And, all three of the “nearby neighbors” groups (EMMCA, Eyes on Hine, and 200 Block of 8th Street SE) have been individually nominated to serve as Resident Members. Hopefully providing some balance, knowledgeable representatives of longtime Hill organizations–CHAMPS, CHRS, and the Eastern Market Citizen Advisory Council—have been asked to serve along with former Commissioner Ken Jarboe, as an At Large Resident.

How the dynamics of the subcommittee will play out are unknown. But, I plan to be fully engaged in and watchful of the PUD process going forward.  And, I urge you too to get involved.

The first meeting on the subcommittee is Monday, November 21 at 7pm at the Hill Center’s 3rd floor conference room.  If you cannot attend, then come back here where I will post my meeting notes.

The Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) held its conceptual review of the developer’s plans for buildings on the 8th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue sides of the Hine site on June 30th.  I was unable to attend so cannot provide my impressions of the hearing.    Commissioner Norman Metzger (ANC6B03) was there, however, and here is his synopsis of the results:

“The HPRB unanimously supported the proposed height, scale, and massing for the parts of the project up for review today, and accepted the HPO Staff Report.  A number of design matters were raised that the Board will consider likely when the project returns after the PUD process is done; for example, the design of the corner at 7th and Pa to provide a visual bond btw 7th Street and Barracks Row, an issue raised by Ken Jarboe today and at [the ANC] Special Call meeting.  The 7th and Pa Ave height issue was hardly mentioned by the Board, other than by the Chair who emphasized that the approval of the height was not to be considered as a precedent, given the special nature of the site.  Next up for the July 28th HPRB is the remainder of the project. ”

On June 21st ANC6B voted 6-3 in support of a statement that was presented at the HPRB hearing by Commissioner Brian Pate (ANC6B05).  Commissioners Metzger, David Garrison (ANC6B01) and I (ANC6B04) had voted in opposition, fundamentally because the statement was crafted in such a way that would have required the 3 of us who voted against the first Hine resolution (April 26th) to abrogate that vote.  Thus, we provided our separate, individual non-ANC6B official testimony at the HPRB hearing on June 30; delivered by Commissioner Garrison.  [Note: Commission By-laws permit such testimony.]

As you can see from the above synopsis, the next step in the HP review of the Hine project will be a conceptual review of the height, scale, and massing of the balance of the proposed buildings on the site: North Residential and 7th & C.  Since HPRB is planning its review on July 28, it seems the ANC will have to schedule a special meeting in July on a date prior to the 28th.  In the Fall, we will all move into the PUD (Planned Unit Development) zoning phase of the project review where a whole different set of issues will be raised.  (If you want to know more about PUDs, go Commissioner Metzger’s <www.ancnorm.org>; for an excellent overview.)

For HPRB background information, such as the staff reports for both the April 28th and June 30th hearings, go to the Historic Preservation Office website <http://planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/Historic+Preservation>; and click on HPRB Meetings.