1 | P a g e

ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION 6B REGULAR MEETING

Hill Center at the Old Naval Hospital

921 Pennsylvania Avenue SE September 8, 2015, 7 p.m.

AGENDA

7p, Chair Oldenburg calls meeting to order. Flahaven, Hoskins, Loots not present.

1. Adoption of Agenda

Oldenburg – Asks commissioners for changes to evening’s agenda. Chao – Requests add under Transportation, consider and support application completed by to request DDOT evaluate traffic pattern at 12th and G SE. Samolyk – On consent agenda, but wished to note 209 C SE did have a letter of support, good to keep on consent. Oldenburg – 1) Remove HillEast Task Force and Eastern Market reports, because we do not have reports this month. 2) Wish to add letter to DCRA Re: Zoning Administrator’s lack of response to an email sent by a commissioner.

This came up at committee meeting in PZ last week, but did not get on the agenda properly, thus requesting to add tonight under PZ as last item. 3) Last minute addition letter to DDOT and DPR regarding VA Ave Park, extend land available for the park. If no one objects, also add to Transportation Cmte agenda. The letter is in meeting materials online. 4) Remove from consent and add to PZ item, the Barracks Row Main Street public art grant, so we can have further discussion. 5) We need to add a budget item, thus under financial number 11, an item to vote on additional funds for printing in FY 2015. Anything else? Just to let everyone know in audience, all items on consent agenda, item 4 will be voted en bloc. No objection from commissioners. Chao moves adoption of agenda as amended, Krepp 2nd. 7-0 approved.

2. Community Speakout Shahara Anderson-Davis – 11th Bridge Park Communications and Engagement Manager – For past 9 months, been working with community and stakeholder creating a development plan and are having an meeting at the arc 10/3 12-2pm to review plan. Have flyers to pass out. RSVP and contact information is online: http://bridgepark.org/about-11th-st-bridge-park Heather Schoell - Realtor with Berkshire Hathaway. Have pleasure of organizing HIlloween. Have already spoken with Diane Hoskins as Eastern Market is in her SMD. Working with Barry at Eastern Market and Andrew at HillRag. There will be a letter to everyone, merchants, neighbors, within certain radius of EM to know that street

2 | P a g e

will be closed on Friday October 30th. Because Halloween is on a Saturday we can’t shut down the market on

Saturday for setup. Thus on Friday, 3:30p begins street closure from 7th Street, 200 block between NC and Penn. Seth Shapiro, Office of Mayor Bowser – Dropped off materials, flyers on events, please take as you leave outside the room. First 6 months have been very busy and the outline is available. Interest in safety in our neighborhood, the Mayor has plan and highlights are available in hard copy. More details are forthcoming but this is the outline of the plans. A lot of work on homelessness as well, making homelessness rare and non reoccurring outline is available for all to pick up. Lastly, fun event, this weekend in Rosedale, counting towards 1 billion steps, Mayor is doing a walk in every ward, and Ward 6 will be in Rosedale. A couple of miles, community walk – flyer is also available. 7:13p - Loots arrive.

3. Community & Commission Announcements

Krepp – Events DC is holding a community meeting on Sept 16th and to seek input on RFK and would hope all would participate. Yes, RFK what are we going to do with RFK within the next 50 years. From 6-9 at St. Coletta at 1901 Independence. This is the first of two community meetings. Second mtg. place/time TBA -Wednesday, Sept 30th. This is our opportunity would appreciate show up. I’m going to speaking with US Attorney Office regarding prosecutions. US Attorney has lousy prosecution rate for misdemeanors – 38 percent. This is unacceptable. 6B10 residents are being assaulted and US Attorney is not prosecuting. If anyone has any questions please see me afterwards. Oldenburg – Before we continue I forgot that none of us introduced ourselves in the beginning – asks Commissioners to introduce ourselves. Commissioner introductions occur. Oldenburg - Last week of Sept, first week of Oct, there will be community meeting DDOT is setting up to get input from community on restoration of Virginia Avenue in conjunction with CSX Tunnel Project. They are looking for input of what we want street to be and how it is landscaped. 7:15p – Hoskins arrive. Hoskins – Sept 26th 10a, Barracks Row Main Street on Barracks Row – Lots of vendors and many of us are staffing booths. Eastern Market CAC Sept 30th 7p, North Hall of EM, Wednesday evening.

4. Consent Agenda Commission Minutes: July 14, 2015 Planning & Zoning Committee DDOT Tracking Number 108397, 1304 South Carolina Avenue SE, fence (over 42 in) & projections

of stoop/steps: Ashton Allan (owner) PSC hearing—September 24, 2015 HPA #15-503, 209 C Street SE, concept/roof addition: William Eskridge (owner) & Ricardo Hendi

(architect) HPA #15-498, 401 11th Street SE, concept/new carriage house: Adolfo Briceno/401 11 St SE LLC

(owner) & Workshop t10-Desiree Hollar (architect) HPA #15-578, 160 North Carolina Avenue SE, concept/attic expansion: The Thomas Jefferson

Institute for the Study of World Politics, Aaron Presnall (owner) & Eric Petersen (architect) HPA #15-580, 705 North Carolina Avenue SE, concept/rear addition: 705 North Carolina Ave SE

LLC, Brian Athey (owner) & Teass/Warren (architect)

3 | P a g e

BZA #18275-A, 1200 Potomac Avenue SE, use variance: Dila Construction (owner) & Cary Kadlecek (counsel). BZA hearing—September 29, 2015

ZC #08-06A and B, Zoning Regulations Review, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Comment period ends September 25, 2015.

Favor: Oldenburg, Burger, Samolyk, Chao, Krepp, Hagedorn, Hoskins, Jayaraman. Abstain: Loots Burger moves to adopt consent agenda, 2nd Samolyk 8-0-1 approved.

5. Presentations Matthew Brown, Budget Director, Office of the Mayor

Brown – Budget Director for District, Mayor Bowser, lives in 6B08, nice to be here. Started in 2007 with DDOT and also worked for Metro and then DDOT now appointed by Mayor in January. Also Chair for BoD of DC Water. Background is in budget public finance, moved to DC from TX in 96 to work on Hill, went to get masters in GW. Went to City of NY, then Wisconsin, but now here, happy to be Budget Director. Difference between CFO and Budget Director - In the mid 90s, city was under financial woes, US Congress imposed independent CFO for the District. CFO hands out the money, certifies funds, mail taxes to CFO, conducts independent revenue projects, certifies budget. In the Mayor’s office, we almost exclusively work in policy. One of

the biggest thing CFO does is certify budget, they tell us if our budget is balanced. Budget Calendar - $13 billion budget, $7 billion raised locally. $5 billion from Congress – things that flow to us if we were a state. Budget is a big exercise in prioritization. The Mayor delivers budget each year and we start in the Fall working for agencies. Agencies get a number to prioritize what they wish to spend and they submit report in December on their priorities. Mayor will hold public involvement sessions in the Fall. Mayor delivers budget in April, each Committee holds meeting on budget in April/May timeframe. Budget is adopted in June. Budget Transparency – Have established online tool for everyone to see how agencies are spending funds, will be launching in the future and let Commission know when it is set up. This is a good year to be involved in the budget process. It will be a tight year due to tax cuts to be implemented. Until we find $150million in new revenues, there will be no new programs. Tax cuts will constrain growth in budget. This also has impact in Capital Program. One of the reasons why we are constrained – not much growth in Capital Program. Have handout to pass with chart showing budget growth v. payoff. Samolyk – Kids Ride Free question – how many participants? Asking because it is an arduous process. Only time to sign up is during work day, have to go with original birth certificate. Majority of parents in city work. Thus it is hard. Not sure, in theory is a great program but hard to sign up. Brown – will take concerns and pass it along. Loots – Part of budget process that’s intriguing has always been surplus v shortfall and how those additional funds are applied. In the past there have been fairly hasty, un-thoughtful funding. How does that process differ from regular funding.

4 | P a g e

Brown – Dealing with that now, with crime, dealing with supplemental budget going to council next week. But spending bills original within executive branch and passed by council. It is mini budget process. $117 million from last quarter surplus we will propose what to be done. Loots – The other part of my question – is more or less Mayor’s discretion of priority subject to council approval. Brown – And council has way to reshuffle the deck. Hoskins – Related to financing for enforcement of synthetic drugs, one idea is looking at civil penalties and redirecting, instead of going to DC funds, redirect to enforcement and research on how to better get to criminal side and using civil penalty, which is primary source of income. Brown – Will take it back. Burger – roughly what is the size of budget v. total debt? Brown - Operations budget is $7billion and debt service increase from $600million to close to a billion four / five years out. Burger – Operations are critical. Would expenditures on new soccer stadium fall under capital budget. Brown - Yes. Burger - Can you talk about how the Mayor view policy perspective allocating between schools and soccer stadium. How does she think about that balance? Brown – I would say she cares about both, concerned about schools, economic development, and jobs. It is a real balancing act. Burger – My request is to hear more about how we justify the categories. There’s no private sector we can rely on to pay for schools. That is a public service. We can argue how we get private entities to pay as much as they could for soccer stadiums etc. You have private sectors willing to invest funds. To me, the grandstanding towards the end, e.g., taking it to Loudon, …you have to make stronger arguments to lean on private sector. Chao – As we are speaking about budget shortfalls, DCRA as the potential to be a revenue generator, however, staffing is an issue. DCRA is not doing their job, and they have a critical role to play and can help address budget shortfall. I have had cases of illegal construction activity with no enforcement. If one inspector is sick, no one is available to fine illegal construction activity; no one works on Sunday and can issue fines is construction is occurring. Krepp – on commissioner Samolyk’s issue- agree that it is awful. Re: Hoskins’ issue – looking at civil penalties, but your database isn’t equal to US Dept of Justice, when you hand off a case, make sure database is coordinated, otherwise, police has no idea of when someone is letting out of jail. Washington Post article highlights Commissioner Burger’s concerns – wasted millions of dollars, lack of oversight. You would be surprised amount of money wasted, going down drain. Last issue, re: evacuation from WMATA – how much money has been blown on homeland security grant. Spent funds supposedly on communications, but still having problems. When will someone start auditing funds because issue is not only to secure more funds but also that funds should be spent properly. Open to audience

5 | P a g e

Audience Q: Arts and humanities? Brown – Have $16m, we were facing shortfalls for FY 16, all agencies reduced by 6 percent. We haven’t started

looking at FY 2017 yet. Please be vocal if something you are passionate about. Jayaraman – When does ANC get more funds to help our communities? Audience: You mention funds that DC receives as we are a state. What is your perspective on statehood and impact on our budget? Brown – Where it gets painful is with supplemental spending bill, proposed and passed by council, then passed by congress. E.g., if Mayor proposes initiative we have to wait for Congress. There are dramatic changes, we are running around with overestimates in one area v. underestimates; requires shifting around. There is a lot of time wasted dealing with this process.

6. Alcohol Beverage Control

ABC Board modification of the Settlement Agreement between ANC 6B and &pizza, 405 8th Street SE

Oldenburg – This is a minimal change that has been done several times in the past. Jayaraman – Describes that change in SA – because provision cannot be enforced by ABC Board. Moves ANC approve the modification to SA for &Pizza, 2nd Hagedorn. 9-0 approved.

7. Planning & Zoning Committee

127 D Street SE, HPA 15-572, permit/new 1-story garage: Ari Gejdenson (owner) Oldenburg – New case, no recommendation from PZ. Gejdenson – Owner of 127 D, we are the only house on block without garage and wish to put garage on back of property. I have pictures of 129 and 131, garages and wish to create similar to 131, a garage with door on side, and line it up with other garages on the block. Samolyk – Met with Ari, walked the property. He is correct he is the only house without garage. We have letter of support from abutting neighbor. This is an easy case, full compliance. Hoskins – 131 is next to 127? Gejdenson – if you look at pictures, points to picture. I own 127 and 125. Hoskins: What about 129? Gejdenson- Owner lives in CT, have been trying to get a hold of the individual who lives in 129. Burger – Spoke with Historic Preservation Office? What was their view? Gejdenson – Went along with exactly what they wanted in our plans.

6 | P a g e

Samolyk – Move to support HP application, 2nd Jayaraman. 9-0 approved.

HPA #15-492, 604 A Street SE, concept/rooftop addition: Martin Aares (owner) & Andrew Pingle (designer)

Burger - Motion passed was to take no position due to lacking project mock up to understand visibility from public space. Pingle – Distributes packets of plan. There have been questions about mock up and railing, decking, etc. The first few pages of the plans, I think the last time I presented this project, I may have gone through designs a little too quickly and raised questions from neighbors. Wish to point out couple of design elements that aren’t revisions.

There were never any windows facing sides. We eliminated rear Juliet balcony based on conversation with neighbors at 606. Privacy issues are not an issue. Other than that, if we go to elevations, they aren’t great drawings.

We have not gone to bid, they are not pretty. They probably show a larger footprint than it is. The initial footprint proposed was based on a flag test. I intended to come to the meeting to do a mock up to resolve whether the construction would be visible or not from the street. We did that and that is where we are now. Hoskins – on E3 question – what is proposed max height. Pingle: 35 feet, 9inches. Hoskins: When you draw line it does not go to the top. Pingle: Max roof line goes from mid point. Hoskins: So 39.5 from midpoint then what is high point of the addition? We exchanged many emails and was raising this question since Saturday. Pingle: Do you want me to guess? I didn’t focus on that because we are 9 feet below what is allowable. Hoskins: I think it is appropriate to know what the height is of the project. Pingle: I am not the licensed purveyor of the project, so legally, I can’t… Hoskins – Can you provide or let us know what is a Mock Up? Pingle: Was instructed by HPO exactly what to build. Hoskins: What did they instruct? Pingle: Bathroom perimeter to build by HP. If you go. If you look at image IM3, that measurement is the NE corner of the bathroom, and page IM4 is the SE corner of bathroom measurement. Then if you go back….we built

across past bathroom to mid point. Hoskins: Sorry we’re going to have to take it a little slow. Which page is the bathroom on? All the way in the

beginning…. Just to be clear these are all questions I emailed you. Krepp- When you (to Hoskins) were trying to ask questions about height, I’m trying to understand about max height? That’s why I’m confused. I thought last Tues we had a definitive height. Now we don’t.

7 | P a g e

Pingle: I lowered it after the meeting. Hoskins: The plans I saw last week is the same height as today. Oldenburg – Let me see if I can clarify. Asking about height to relationship to mock up. Hoskins – I had chance to go view it and have concerns about mock up because it is unclear what was mocked up. We can’t be sure it is not visible. Let’s figure out what was mocked up first. Burger – The entire eastern wall. Hoskins – No they did not….I see so you mocked up that… Pingle: From here to here around to here. Hoskins: But just that bathroom corner. Pingle: That’s an 8 foot length, Hoskins: But it doesn’t go to the party wall. Pingle: No, but…..this could be my fault…. Samolyk – You gave more than what is required by HP. Pingle: The one thing I cannot manipulate is actual physical construction. That is why I came to the board to suggest that is the only way to prove that what we are proposing would not be visible from the street. Samolyk – I just want to say thank you and I understand you erected the mock up the next day. I know we put a lot on you for a week. And say thank you to the neighbors, Danielle, and Martin and I was able to go there and could not see any sightline. For me I appreciated it and did not see sightline. Oldenburg – I’m going to suggest, because we’re going to send a letter to the Board, whether we support or not, we

can always ask HPRB to make sure that the sightline based on this mock up – to make sure there is no visibility from the street. We can craft some language. We are not architects we have to take people at face value. Pingle - I did put online better images of what is given. If anyone likes to get up on the roof, we can arrange for that. Oldenburg – Stucco? Pingle - Brick painted, entire rear needs to be finished. I think I used … I have been in contact with CHRS, we are meeting tonight, with intention to talk to them and see what they suggest. Very simply, continue to paint brick to match. We got a package of details from HPO. Oldenburg – between CHRS and HPO staff, they are going to be suggesting how exterior should be handled. Hoskins – I don’t have any questions, but comments. Krepp – We have received several letters from neighbors. Are any letters from neighbors we haven’t received?

8 | P a g e

Hoskins – I have 3 letters, of the 3, only one is in vicinity for support. The two letters of support are from friends, which is nice. This is kind of a special block because the abutting property is in similar scale to this property. Because of unique nature of this corner on 6th street, there are about 6-7 very vocal opposed neighbors, just the one in town. Oldenburg opens to audience. Thane Young – of 606 A SE. We are very concerned about the mock up, that it is done only for eastern wall of the addition. The highest wall of the addition is on the west side because all drainage will slope to east. At very minimum we need to have an understanding of what the elevation is of west wall. It is that one that negatively impacts 3 property on A, creating a canyon effect. Oldenburg – Issue is visibility and what to see from public space. Young - My concern is lowest wall is what is built. A higher wall may be seen from public street. At very least we should have mock up done. I think we should be clear what rule this project would be considered under. As I review the rule, I have question as to what would fall under 35 feet limitation or not. Also solar panels to be on top of structure those could possibly be seen from public street/alley. We don’t have any understanding of what it would look like. Burger- On issue of height of western wall – I understand, but based on physics of sightlines, that would, if you think about the angle, the rear view would be steeper. If you can’t see it from now, you should not be able to see western

wall. To your point about the height, we had questions whether it falls under zoning relating to pop up or not. The owners say they filed this prior so they are exempt. This is what DCRA will have to decide. If they aren’t exempt it

will turn to zoning case. But that is not the issue we are considering because we are looking at HP issues. Oldenburg- DCRA will come into play when applying for building permit. Karli Moe – Abutting homeowners, short statement. We have 606A, 602A and homes on 6th street form a very individually distinctive property, with very distinctive corner because we are very packed in rowhouse. We would argue that historic nature of 602 and 606 are compromised by the proposal, that being historic nature of our corner. We know HP includes sightlines, street scapes, neighborhood standards. And urge you to come over and take a look. I want to say to some who weren’t here last time. There are 5 adjacent and abutting properties. All 5 adjacent and

abutting homeowners, long term capitol hill residents, all are strongly opposed and have submitted letters. We oppose the project and hope you deny it. If you choose not to do that we would at least ask you weighing 5 homeowners who have invested a lot and followed Historic Preservation rules, if you won’t deny, at least postpone

the project for any further consideration until complete mock up is built. We were told mock up is complete on Wed. We looked at adjacent, it is now complete. You can’t tell historic impact on 606 A and on row homes. It is very important entire mock up be built. I wrote a letter with specification knowing of all 4 walls so we know exact demarcation on roof, etc. And so we know this is not your specific concern but feel as ANC you are the only place that can hear us neighbors and hope you can hear balance existing voices of 5 property owners and vote to postpone the project until complete mock up be built. Kim Wheeling 22 6th SE – I’m the 6th abutter as there are 6 abutting properties. I share piece of my backyard wall with 604A, and I also oppose for same reason as Karli. It is a very tightly configured group of houses and truly cannot see how … I’m wondering how a mock up of roofline can actually tell us whether we see a wall from street. There’s a gap between Thane’s house and 604, this house, from the street you would have to be able to see that wall.

In any event I want to be on record that there are 6 abutting, all opposed.

9 | P a g e

Gerry Eddings – 24 6th Street, abutting property. Simply wish to say am here because share concerns expressed by Young and Moe. Hoskins – In this instance, I would urge us not to send a letter of support. I really think that we have the option to oppose or support, but in this case, given the concerns neighbors have outlined, I would rather ANC choose not to send letter of support. It is on the basis from my perspective there are a lot of outstanding questions. I am personally concerned that the architect can’t tell us a basic answer of roofline. I asked for it by email days before. I asked for it again tonight. He told us he isn’t qualified to tell us that in detail. He let us know they changed the plans to account for neighbor concerns; all things he said sound great, am encouraged by the progress, I also understand that there may not be a historic issue. There are some fundamental questions and lack of information. Samolyk – We are deciding on HP case but not on these other issues. Burger/Pingle – Question to Pingle on structure – A: 2 pitch, rise roughly 12 inches, height of roof on western edge approximately 36.9. Pingle – You have to be a licensed surveyor to qualify to state the information. Oldenburg – (to Hoskins) your suggestion is because of missing information and lack of confidence by neighbors of mock up. Hoskins – Thank you yes, and my general comment, I think we are all excited to move forward on projects under time constraints. It was August and we are under illusion I am sensitive to the time crunch. As the ANC commissioner I don’t think we have to provide a letter support just because we can. Loots – I’ll 2nd that we take no position. Oldenburg- I won’t support this because I really think we ought to go to the Board and ask them to settle these issues. I am confident mock up is pretty accurate, but I know they are the ultimate judgment whether it’s physical or

not. I am not concerned about it, I really can’t support us not take a position and rather see us take a position,

support it, because I think it is appropriate. Our support is contingent on these issues being settled at the Board level. Loots – The reason I think this is rare case of taking no position is necessary is for some of the same reasons Oldenburg said – is that the Board ultimately has a better expertise understanding of history of application of HP laws. I’m grasping right now with we are being asked to 2nd guess what might be the case of the application of HP laws to this site. I don’t view it as a matter of judgment call on our part, whether we like or don’t like façade. But is it consistent with HP or not is this case. And I don’t feel based on record before us it is decision we can be informed

in making. While I do share concern that when it goes to HP and they have a total understanding of mock up better than us tonight, I’m not sure if that additional information would make me informed enough for me to decide if it is

or isn’t consistent with HP. I’m also moved by one neighbors’ comment. HP laws extend beyond just one building

in an isolated vacuum. It is the neighborhood, complete historic district. Again the HP Board is better suited to make that decision so I am reluctant to weigh in. Burger – I am not planning to support this motion. To your point, Commiossioner Loots, we are asked to weigh in on every HP case, but we are not asked to assert our opinion of design. It is whether or not it meet guidelines applied to HP. In most cases we make them entirely based on what we see in paper. This case is a little different due to gap between building and there’s odd angle. So applicant has constructed mock up and it is sufficient for me

to feel they will not violate HP rules. They constructed relevant walls, have constructed proper height. They consulted with Sarah at HP and verbal said mock up met her needs. Fully acknowledge neighbors do not agree. We have zoning laws and HP laws to ensure no one can have an undue burden on neighbors. I know people don’t like

10 | P a g e

the project but from my perspective I would support it as HP application and can’t support motion we aren’t taking a

motion based on lack of info because I believe I have enough info. Krepp – I do lack information and appreciate lots of questions being asked. I need more answers. We are hearing from abutting neighbors’ displeasure and we owe them opportunity to have greater clarity. Absent more information I am uncomfortable supporting this. Oldenburg – Remember neighbors have opportunity to appear in front of HPRB to discuss this issue. We aren’t the last to… Samolyk – I want to say that we have a number of pop ups that we decided under 3 minutes to go through. I feel that they went above and beyond what was requested by HP. It is hard to reconcile how everyone vote by one. The owners have rights too, they bought that house. I could argue that neighbors are being a little unreasonable to the new neighbors. Chao – On the issue of pop up cases and deliberation, we have considered different cases under different circumstances, some BZA some HP and they are all different and all aren’t equal. E.g., the “pop up” case that was in

commissioner Jayaraman’s district was only BZA applying only to issue of parking relief, so it was a quick decision. Hoskins – Motion language - Move ANC take no position because we are unclear whether this meets historic guidelines in particular concerned about unique nature of this block. Loots – My concern as 2nd to that is that I respectfully disagree with Chair. If we take no position, we take no position. We don’t’ have to tell anyone why. Oldenburg – Our great weight is squandered. Loots – To justify why we are voting for or against merits support. To justify why no position we are in effect abstaining from involving ourselves. Starting before you started… Hoskins – We have option to send a letter. Loots – I view option as sending no letter, we have opportunity to but not obligation to weigh in. Oldenburg – We have motion to not take a position. Loots – Allow me to clarify. A letter explaining why - one paragraph letter taking no position is appropriate. But I don’t think we need to describe because. Oldenburg – There is a motion on table does someone wish to offer friendly amendment. And we will vote on it and vote on resulting motion. At this point what we have is no support, not taking position due to missing information basically. Hoskins – We can say missing or unclear whether this meets historic guidelines due to unique nature of block. Loots – I would offer friendly to delete, so that we inform the board we are taking no position Hoskins – So you want to cut the rest off? If so I don’t accept the friendly amendment. I wish to offer that we take no position because it is unclear whether this meets historic guidelines; in particular we’re concerned about the

unique nature of this block.

11 | P a g e

Loots – I withdraw my 2nd. Krepp – I’ll 2nd. Favor: Hoskins, Hagedorn, Jayaraman, Chao, Krepp Opposed – Loots, Burger, Oldenburg, Samolyk. Approved, 5-4

BZA #18640A, 761 10th Street SE, modification of #18640: Barry Jackson (owner) & Robert Berriz (builder). BZA hearing—October 6, 2015

Berriz - Original had two windows and door in the kitchen and bank of 4 windows and door at family room. We wish to change to one bigger window in kitchen and bigger door for our family room. No changes on garage. On two sight property lines there were cedar fence, change to brick fence, so brick wall instead of cedar fence. There was a pergola connect garage to house to require tie the two together. Oldenburg – Have questions. This property in my SMD went through original BZA case, it was very challenging for many. In fact the BZA had to delay decision due to negotiation between this property owner and abutting north side owner. Through that process, we negotiated number of changes, BZA order that came out reflected changes. A number of things have happened since then and I have put together mainly what I am concerned about here…

unfortunately abutting neighbors cannot be here tonight. I’m having to represent them and their views. The brick

wall, is going to be built on the owner’s property correct? Berriz - Correct. Oldenburg – Real issue is on the carriage house. This is an evolution, would like to see this. If you look at first it was original plan submitted 7/26/13, the second one reflects negotiations and mainly what neighbors concerned about are the first drawings, people occupying house walking into their property going to center door. Windows are large and can peer into property next door. In revision 12/10/13, windows changed to smaller, entranced moved to side, doors to garage faced underneath. When you submitted current plans to BZA you had garage doors shifted to north side of carriage house. Berriz - Right. Oldenburg - You show that as current plan, but that does not conform to BZA plan. What you request now is to leave that door there and put trellis along the neighbor’s house, along the wall separating abutting property. You

shifted that over. That’s why you’ve requested modification here. What happened with the door, you don’t ask for

modification and it does not conform to BZA order. The reason why trellis on south was to provide as much privacy as possible, and now you switched it back. I’m having trouble here because I can’t speak to impact on brick wall v.

fence. I will say brick is more private and creates dense air. Burger – It looks like this is a wide property with two lots. The carriage sits along north flow, when you move trellis from south to north it means instead of running middle it runs edge of property. Berriz - If it’s a privacy issue the neighbor next door upstairs looking down, the trellis on north gives more privacy. Oldenburg - No it gives your people more privacy. Does it. Berriz - Yes, when people look down they aren’t looking into their yard.

12 | P a g e

Oldenburg - explains to Krepp clarification. Krepp – Why are you coming before us? Oldenburg – asking to make modification to previous order. Krepp – Are neighbors happy? Oldenburg – Problem we have tonight is we don’t have owners on north side here because they already scheduled

out of town trips. They will appear at BZA. Knowing previous case and all the work negotiated to increase privacy at that time, question is whether this enhances or reduces privacy. The floating door that should be a modification request because it does not conform to BZA. Berriz - You are right, we submitted it and they approved it. The biggest concern isn’t the door or trellis it is the

back of the house. The trellis was for privacy. I don’t know, having never done BZA myself if they approve

something do they do part or do they approve or reject entire proposal? Hoskins – Because this was considered by prior ANC can you give us a flavor or what the vote was? Oldenburg – I have letter we sent to BZA 9-0-1 in which we said we support contingent on follow changes to plans…setback of rear portion to reduce privacy, on garage…Oldenburg reads from letter sent to BZA. Question of changing trellis is consistent. Berriz – I’m glad you asked because zoning asked about the door. Oldenburg – It’s a very confusing case. Because neighbor is not here, they, I hope they will be going to October 6 hearing to present their position. Burger – I would say, I tend to be deferential to prior negotiation because it sounds like fair amount of time put in that effort. I would like to see us push back on anything that is inconsistent with prior negotiated agreement. The BZA can certainly approve parts of entire proposal. I would be very happy to support something in which we support as opposed to take no position. I would also support motion that would oppose that is inconsistent. Hoskins – I would support something along that line and we can say in letter we maintain support for prior position but also let them know that neighbors were not present and we value their input. Oldenburg – Motion would be whether we don’t support modification because inconsistent with original order and I

would call out trellis and the door and that they are not consistent with original order, Burger – The changes to the rear window… Oldenburg – We did not have opportunity to discuss with neighbors and expect them to present to Board. Burger – I would be happy if we write we support modification not inconsistent with negotiations. So rear window is fine. The trellis is specific issue agreed upon. I don’t know why we would go back on that. It would be a

nuanced letter citing support for some and non support for some, and value neighbors’ future input. Oldenburg – I would certainly move that. We have language problem, but I’m clear in that we would move to support request for modification that is not inconsistent with the original order but note that the trellis and the door

13 | P a g e

relocation re inconsistent with original order and we have not been able to work with the neighbors to obtain their views on these changes. 2nd Burger 9-0 approved.

Barracks Row Main Street, Support for Public Art Building Communities Grant (Commission on Arts and Humanities), two concept sculptures for EM Metro plaza: Martin Smith, Executive Director, BRMS

Oldenburg – Move that we substitute the committee’s recommendation, which read recommend ANC support with

exception that applicant will return to 6b for further consultation. It sounded too vague and does not talk about discussions we have. Thus my substitute is ANC 6B support … appreciates Barracks Row….arts and humanity

grants app. However ANC6B does not … and in addition concern of impact of new sculpture on EM Metro

masterplan. Thus should BRMS receive grants money, organization is requested to return to ANC consultation and approval in public meeting. Hoskins 2nd, offer friendly. Suggest they also consult Eastern Market Metro Task Force. Smith: We run Eastern Market Metro Task Force. Hoskins – Right but I want you to consult the Task Force Members. It’s the group that BRMS convened to develop

EM Master Plan years ago. It is the core group that commented on plaza. Masterplan Stakeholder group. Oldenburg – Accepts friendly amendment. Burger – The language here is we do not necessarily support. My personal opinion is I quite like what you have here and I understand concerns people have as it is important to consider master plan. I want to give credit for the proposal, and proposing something. No one else has stepped up, so kudos to you guys for putting something on the table. I’m happy to support revised motion and it does not imply we oppose. Samolyk – I’m really sad about state of metro plaza right now. It is horrible. I can think about the pig with bullet hole that sat in front of Hine for years. I hope that we have more funds.. Oldenburg – Motion is extremely clear we get another substantial crack before we move forward. It was just too vague and that was my reason for motion. Smith - If I may respond quickly this is the type of thing that we need to happen, support for the community, it is a community effort. BRMS can’t proceed and didn’t get here overnight without support for community. Oldenburg – We do have commitment in writing from PSA 107 Fowler to ensure his team focuses on issue of the plaza and on 400 block of Barracks Row. I have that in writing since I wrote to Cmdr Brown our issues. MPD cannot solve it along. CM Allen, businesses, all partnering. Hoskins – Make point future of plaza, this ANC has advocated for EM Metro Plan and funding, and SE Library Expansion in Capital Budget. There are some really positive things happening. Calling out support for Metro Plan… Oldenburg – Any more discussion of motion? No? All in favor? 9-0, Approved.

14 | P a g e

Motion from Planning and Zoning Cmte Re: Letter to Zoning Administrator

Burger – Letter to DCRA. Recommended ANC write to Director to DCRA asking why Zoning Administrator did not respond to BZA Case… From committee, no 2nd needed 9-0, Approved.

8. Transportation Committee

Letter to DDOT on VA Ave Park – Oldenburg - Asking agencies to work together, submitted by Oldenburg, to add land to the park. This afternoon I made google earth search and received map. (shows map to commission) Points to parcel of land, that was used by Forestry UFA. Would add larger area to the park to make it more available to people. Move to send letter to DDOT. 2nd Krepp – 9-0, Approved.

Letter to DDOT on Study of Intersection of 12th and G SE Oldenburg – In July we wrote a letter to DDOT asking intersection 12 and G to be re evaluated. They agreed to do that and are on the way. Bureaucrats need petition from neighbors on this because some ANCs have audacity to send in requests without consulting the neighbors. We would authorize Chair Oldenburg to write letter to DDOT on behalf of ANC and neighbors on 1200 block of G SE. Chao - Move we write letter transmitting support to DDOT. Burger 2nd, 9-0 approved.

9. Outreach & Constituent Services Task Force and July Report

Letter to Metropolitan Police Department on Strengthening Relationship Between MPD and Residents

Oldenburg - Commissioner Flahaven not present, so stepping in; the letter to MPD is in the packet. We wish to meet with Cmdr Brown to talk about connecting police with citizens and come up with ideas to improve relationship. The letter has text in italics and reason is to incorporate commander Brown/Eddie Fowler taking focus on that area. I may need to add that as amendment to letter. Samolyk – I think we can be tougher in the letter. Oldenburg – Yes and we ask that we have engagement per quarter. Krepp – I went to US Att Office and asked what can they tell me about prosecution. Answer from their rep is “I

don’t know”. They can’t tell me the prosecution rate and interesting disconnect between police department both MPD and DoJ have different database. US Atty Office is not prosecuting. The prosecution rate is under 38 percent. Assaults aren’t prosecuted. Misdemeanors either. I am happy to draft letter, and happy to brief you guys. I wish to know what the prosecution rate is and why you can’t tell us this. How can you manage this if you can’t figure out

how many cases you have. Oldenburg – Suggest you talk to Commissioner Flahaven on this supplement and work with him on TF.

15 | P a g e

Krepp – I’m gong to do this as separate because MPD has no oversight of US DoJ. Hoskins – I’ve heard Ofc of AG looks into are there way by ballot measure who is prosecuting transfer DoJ to City. Given where the situation is, it is a conversation we should have with more people. This is not just a measure of what are your prosecution rate. It is why DoJ is doing this. Oldenburg – I think those are all good issues and we need to move on. When we met with assistant chief, they recognized the disconnect between the two database so you could track the case. Krepp – But he is not working on the database. Hoskins – Yes there needs to be some coordination of data. I’m adding for record and discussion. Burger – Hear your point but we need to discuss more and put action. Samolyk – When I was deciding on running for ANC I saw there would be rep from MPD here and it seemed to be that MPD was more present. Was in the past ANC had more participation? Oldenburg - No we rarely had MPD they didn’t routinely show up. Hoskins – Larry tonight is at PSA 104 meeting and hearing attendance is really high, looking into what is going on. Oldenburg – As commission we need to have in depth conversation and for future opportunity. We have a recommendation from TF so it does not require a 2nd. Do I have votes in support? Approved, 8-0-1.

10. Financial Treasurer’s Report

Hoskins – Am on page 25, start with monthly treasurer’s report. Gives total income, balance, expenditure to date. Included actual listing of FY 2015 expenditures to give sense of category of costs, full month of expenditures. That should probably be our final expenditures and included two checks I need sigs on tonight. I need one non-Kirsten officer to sign one of them for copying expenses. Then on page 28 you will see our 13, 14, 15 budget as passed last year to give you what our history was and disbursement by fiscal year. I included FY 15 amended budget that shows what we passed in April. The green column shows year to date actuals. The only category where we went over is printing and copying by small amount of $22.48. Asked auditor and auditor said not a problem. Hoskins - I move that we add $22.48 to printing budget. Oldenburg 2nd, 9-0 approved.

FY 2016 Budget Hoskins - In salmon colored column you’ll see FY 2016 budget. The exception is 60 dollars for postage and delivery. We didn’t have it last year, but .. I dramatically increased our printing budget. We spent total of $122 last year for next year I budgeted a hundred per month, allows us to make copies as needed, in case we need to have packets for Mayor or CM Allen staff. I put down independent contractor estimate for purchases column as opposed to salary and wages. I calculated and we can raise it. I estimated 9,600, $800 per month. If we were paying hourly

16 | P a g e

it would be $20 per hour at 40 hours per month. I recommend we do not do hourly rate and set a fee for service so we are very clear in terms of our tax status for independent contractor v. employee. Samolyk – e.g., fixed fee for deliverables? Hoskins – Exactly. Samolyk – I would think we want a little more money in there. We could allocate $12K. Hoskins - $17K for 2014. Total costs were higher. Ok we will up that, category 14 amended for $12K. Oldenburg – What we plan on this evening is consulting on draft, and voting next month on final. October 13th. Hoskins – We definitely don’t need to pass this tonight. The only expense is check for space for meeting, I have

written it and available. Oldenburg – Did a good job, let’s give all time to consider the numbers and finalize next month.

11. Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee Report

Hine Community Advisory Committee Report

Hoskins – included upcoming schedule. Excavation is to be completed in November time frame. A number of hiccups along the road. But I would like some feeedback moving forward on conversation. There’s a lot.

Jayaraman – I have compliments. Very little rats. Vibration was there, but seemed to abated.

Burger – Terms of things to look for in coming months, what things worked well, what things we feel like various committee took active role in that have paid dividends, what things we wish to do differently.

Hoskins – What I wish to raise is Saturday work and I don’t know if other construction management agreements negotiate Mon-Fri work. In Hine, it was agreed to Mon-Fri. Exception was for inclement weather delays. Now one of the proposals from developer is to bank weather days. So that this week, there were 5 weather days, = bank 5 Saturdays to be used at whatever stage of project they wish to. This is an issue we are grappling with and is not in line with the spirit of original authorization.

Hagedorn – Don’t like the idea of banking. Oldenburg – Wishes to request Barry Magneson to come in at next EC meeting to give us details of extended contracts. Hoskins – wish to ask Forrest Hayes.

12. Adjournment

Jayaraman – Moves we adjourn and reconvene at next ANC monthly meeting on October 13th. 9-0 approved.

Settlement Agreement ANC 6B

Las Placitas, Inc. Page 1 of 5

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION 6B

and Las Placitas, Inc. d/b/a Las Placitas

Pursuant to this Settlement Agreement, (“Agreement”), by and between Las Placitas, Inc.

(d/b/a Las Placitas) (“Applicant”) and Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B (“ANC6B”),

effective as of the date of its adoption by ANC6B, the parties hereto hereby agree to be legally bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement, superseding and replacing all previous agreements with respect to Applicant as it relates to its application for a Class “CR” License (ABRA-0100267) (“License”), now pending before the District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Regulatory Administration (“ABRA”), for conduct of business located at 1100 8th Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003 (“Premises”).

WHEREAS Applicant has applied before ABRA to effect, and is seeking its approval of,

a new License for the Premises; and WHEREAS Applicant and ANC6B wish to voluntarily and mutually memorialize the

terms and conditions upon which ANC6B has agreed to support the Applicant's License, pursuant to the provisions of D.C. Code § 25-446, for the operation and maintenance of Applicant’s business in such a manner as to further promote the security, sanitation, peace, order and quiet of the neighborhood in a manner that ANC6B deems to be in the best interests of the neighborhood; and

WHEREAS ANC6B hereby supports the Applicant's License upon the agreement of

Applicant to execute and abide by the terms and conditions hereof;

It is THEREFORE AGREED AND RESOLVED as follows: 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein by reference. 2. Nature of the Business. The Applicant will manage and operate at the Premises its CR license as a full-service restaurant (“Establishment”). The Applicant currently seeks a total seating for up to 78 patrons, inclusive of 40 indoor seating and 38 sidewalk café seating. In no event shall Applicant operate or seek to operate the Establishment in excess of the maximum number of patrons that may lawfully occupy the Premises pursuant to its Certificate of Occupancy. 3. Hours of Operation and Sales. The Applicant’s hours of operation and alcoholic beverage sales may be changed from time to time at Applicant's discretion, or as may be otherwise permitted by its License, but in no event shall exceed or extend beyond the following:

Settlement Agreement ANC 6B

Las Placitas, Inc. Page 2 of 5

The Applicant’s hours of Operation shall be as follows: Sunday through Thursday: 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday: 10:00 a.m. – 3:00 a.m.

The Applicant's sale of alcohol within and operation of the Sidewalk Cafe shall be as follows:

Sunday through Thursday: 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 midnight Friday and Saturday: 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 midnight

Provided, however, (1) on days designated by the DC ABC Board as “extended Hours for

ABC Establishments” Applicant may serve alcoholic beverages for one additional hour (that is,

one hour later in the morning); (2) in the event the Council of the District of Columbia or the ABC Board grant licensees in general extended operating hours for particular event(s), Applicant may avail itself of such extended hours; and, (3) on January 1 of each year Applicant may serve alcoholic beverages and provide entertainment until 4 am. These extended hours are for inside the establishment. 4. Requirements for Operation of Sidewalk Café. The Applicant shall operate its Sidewalk Café consistent with the terms and conditions of its Public Space Management Branch Certification for such space, and shall cause its employees to maintain the Sidewalk Café in a clean and orderly manner, and not to cause or permit storage of any refuse, foodstuffs, perishable or odiferous materials in or adjacent to the Sidewalk Café. The Applicant shall cause the area extending from the Sidewalk Cafe to the curb on the side of the Establishment to be regularly swept and shall remove litter and debris on not less than a daily basis, weather permitting. 5. Refuse Storage and Disposal. Applicant shall establish, maintain, and use an exterior private area behind the Premises to dispose of all recyclable trash, and non-recyclable trash (garbage) in a minimum of 3 jumbo-size plastic trash bins for trash and 2 jumbo bins for recycling. Applicant shall maintain the area around the exterior trash and recycling receptacles clean and free of debris, trash, liquids, or other foreign materials. Applicant shall ensure that the lids to any such receptacles are closed completely and secured as per their design at all times except when they are being filled or emptied. Applicant shall ensure that all waste grease is placed in a secure and well-maintained container inside the Premises. Garbage shall be collected a minimum of three (3) days per week (Monday, Thursday, and Saturday) and recycling a minimum of three days per week (or such more frequent schedules as may be reasonably necessary to prevent the receptacles from exceeding their capacity), and applicant shall adhere to the following conditions:

a. All garbage, recycling, and grease collections shall occur after 7:00 a.m. or before 10:00 p.m.;

b. No recyclable and non-recyclable trash shall be disposed of into the exterior trash receptacles or placed in the trash storage area after 10 p.m. or before 7 a.m.

Settlement Agreement ANC 6B

Las Placitas, Inc. Page 3 of 5

c. Direct access shall be provided to the sanitation, garbage and recycling companies for purposes of removing refuse from the exterior trash storage area;

d. All receptacles used for garbage and recyclables shall be secured with lids and kept within the designated exterior trash storage area only, unless being hauled to or from sanitation trucks. Trash and recycling receptacles must not block the path from the rear yard area of the abutting establishment passageway;

e. A grease storage container shall be kept in a designated area within the Premises

f. All recyclable and non-recyclable trash that prevents a trashcan lid to be closed completely overnight shall be retained inside the Premises.

g. Any trash or recyclables generated or collected between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. shall be stored in a designated space within the Premises;

h. All receptacles must be maintained in good repair, safe and sanitary conditions. If any receptacle is damaged, the Applicant will immediately order a replacement trash can from the garbage or recycling company;

i. Garbage, recycling or grease spills shall be cleaned up as they occur;

j. Daily, prior to opening, the Applicant shall ensure that no debris was left around the garbage and recycling receptacles or within the passageway;

k. Power wash the trash area, receptacles, and the passageway weekly or more often in order to prevent food or grease film on the floor of the trash storage area; and,

l. Cooperate with and permit inspection of the Premises, including but not limited to the indoor and exterior trash storage area, as may be reasonably requested by any District of Columbia governmental entity.

6. Noise, Odor and Emission Control. To the maximum extent practicable, no loud noises, objectionable sounds, foul odors, or other conditions shall be created or permitted by Applicant to be publicly observable or emitted beyond the immediate proximity of the Premises. Applicant will take all reasonable steps necessary to mitigate noise emanating from mechanical equipment associated with the Applicant’s operations (e.g. air conditioning unit, grease fan) -- including installing sound-mitigating insulating material around the equipment, if necessary -- to comply with applicable DCMR provisions, prevent an increase in existing sound level from such equipment, and minimize or abate noises objectionable to residential neighbors. This shall include installation and maintenance of sound dampening materials on the Premises and use of materials sufficient to eliminate noise or vibration from penetrating the abutting building arising from ordinary and customary usage of the Premises. 7. Sanitation and Pest Control. Applicant shall maintain in force a contract for regular and recurring application of a plan for pest control that includes baiting or similar rodent abatement procedures for the Premises, including the exterior trash storage area. Applicant shall not store or place any kegs, bottles, foodstuffs, palettes of materials, or other consumable goods of any type outside the Premises, in the passageway or exterior trash storage area. Any leak or spillage of grease shall be promptly cleaned utilizing standard industry practices such as solvents and power washing for such uncontained grease, and any damaged or leaking containers shall be promptly repaired or replaced.

Settlement Agreement ANC 6B

Las Placitas, Inc. Page 4 of 5

8. Maintenance of Public Space Adjacent to Front of Premises. Applicant shall maintain the public space adjacent to and in front of the Premises in a clean and orderly manner, and not cause or permit storage of any refuse, foodstuffs, perishable or odiferous materials in or adjacent to the Premises. The Applicant shall cause the area extending from the front door(s) to the curb in front of the Establishment to be regularly swept, power-washed, and shall remove litter and debris on not less than a daily basis, weather permitting. Applicant shall provide exterior receptacles for extinguishing and disposing of smoking materials, and such supplemental refuse disposal receptacles as may be reasonably required to contain and minimize public disposal of trash and litter originating from the Premises. 9. Security Cooperation in Stemming Loitering and Illegal Drugs. Applicant shall to the full extent permissible by law discourage loitering in the vicinity of the Premises. Applicant agrees to monitor for and prohibit sales or use of illegal drugs within or about the Premises and maintain contact and cooperate with MPD and other enforcement officials when known or suspected drug activities occur. 10. Compliance with ABRA Regulations. Applicant promises that it shall abide by all Alcoholic Beverage Regulations Administration (ABRA) regulations regarding the ownership of the license and all other provisions applicable to liquor licenses. 11. Agreement Otherwise in Full Force and Effect. Except as otherwise explicitly provided herein, the most recent Agreement shall remain in full force effect until the approval of this Agreement which shall constitute the agreement between the parties. The Agreement may only be modified by written agreement of all the parties or their successors, or otherwise in accordance with law.

Settlement Agreement ANC 6B

Las Placitas, Inc. Page 5 of 5

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have affixed hereunto their signatures. Applicant:

Las Placitas Inc. (d/b/a Las Placitas) ABRA-100267 1100 8th Street SE Washington, DC 20003 Isidoro Amaya and Juan Ramon Amaya President and Secretary, respectively 202-957-3652

Signature: _______________________________ Date: ____________ ANC:

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B 921 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20003 Kirsten Oldenburg, Chairperson

Signature: _______________________________ Date: ____________

1

ADVISORY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION 6B PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING

Report of the ANC6B Planning and Zoning Committee

October 6, 2015, 7:00 p.m. Commissioners present: Burger (chairing), Chao, Hagedorn, Hoskins, Krepp, Oldenburg, Samolyk Resident members (RM) present: Danks, Jarboe, Jeffords

1. Rock ‘n Roll DC Marathon (March 2016): Diane Romo Thomas (RnR), and Donald Nennis andJames Jaffe (MPD Special Operations Division) Ms. Thomas reviewed the measures her organization is taking this year to address issues with the marathon in 2015. The race will be on March 12th 2016 and follow basically the same course as 2015. There will be additional porta johns near the metro (by Events DC) and at the finish line (Rock’n’Roll Marathon). There will be additional staff to help manage traffic, specifically helping to move people to the metro entrances. They will have additional trash receptacles on 19th street. Event staff will work with ANC commissioners to improve outreach to schools and residents on Capitol Hill. Commissioner Krepp moved (seconded by Commissioner Samolyk) that the committee recommend the ANC support the race proposal, contingent on WMATA appearing before the October 13th ANC meeting to answer questions about operational issues related to Friday package pickup and on race day. The motion passed 9 to 0 (1 abstaining).

2. HPA #15-629, 801 Virginia Avenue SE, concept/new construction of 4-story building: Alon Street, Northfield Development The proposed project is a by-right four story 22-unit mixed use building, which will include 11 parking spots and retail on the ground floor. The developer has had discussions with HP and CHRS. The site is zoned C-3-A and is within the Eighth Street Overlay district. There are no abutting residences, but Northfield has been conferring with commercial property owners in the area. Commissioner Oldenburg moved (seconded by Commissioner Samolyk) that the committee recommend the ANC support the case and place the item on the consent calendar. The motion passed 10 to 0.

3. DCRA Raze Permits, 1620 and 1622 E Street SE: Mr. J.D. Schmidt, Connell & Schmidt

2

The developer is proposing demolition of existing residential buildings on the two lots. Later plans are to subdivide the two lots into three lots and then construct three three-story row houses. Mr. Schmidt will be filing an application to BZA for the subdivision. Commissioner Burger moved (seconded by RM Danks) that the committee recommend the ANC support the case and place the item on the consent calendar. The motion passed 9 to 0 (1 abstaining).

4. Letter to Stanton-Eastbanc on Hine Development Construction Problems Commissioner Hoskins reviewed the concerns about the Hine construction process and whether it is consistent with the Construction Management Agreement (CMA). Specific issues include:

Use of vibratory hammer Lack of notice of work on specific dates Generator use prohibited during specific hours Questionable accounting of lost work days On some days work has begun prior to agreed start time Construction parking issues, including lack of contracted off-site parking lot Standing and queuing of idling trucks Issues with trucks adhering to approved routes Flagperson provision has been inconsistent Insufficient notice to CAC on sidewalk closures Incomplete covered walkway around the site (7th Street) Issues with pre-construction monitoring/surveys Some problems with dust control on Saturday

The committee agreed to table the item to next week’s ANC meeting.

5. S. Department of the Navy/U.S. Marine Corps, Draft Programmatic Agreement regarding Multiple Projects in Support of Marine Barracks Washington—Comments due October 16, 2015 Commissioner Oldenburg presented the section 106 document, which the ANC is invited to sign. Commissioner Oldenburg moved (seconded by Commissioner Krepp) that the committee recommend the ANC become a signatory to the document and send comments on the draft—specifically on the lack of a remedies process —to the Marine Corps. The item will be placed on the consent calendar.

3

The motion passed 10 to 0.

6. PUD Subcommittee Report

Commissioner Burger summarized the September 28th PUD Subcommittee meeting. The Subcommittee heard a presentation by the Insight Property Group team about their proposed PUD on the 1300 block of E St SE. The Subcommittee also reviewed a consolidated list of potential benefits and amenities that the three PUD projects could contribute. The next subcommittee meeting (October 20) will aim to compile a consolidated list of benefits and amenities for the 1401 Penn PUD project.

page 1

October 13, 2015

Anthony Lanier

Managing Partner, Stanton-Eastbanc

Dear Mr. Lanier:

We are writing to share concerns related to violations of the Hine School construction

management agreement between Stanton-Eastbanc, LLC and Advisory Neighborhood

Commission 6B. ANC 6B voted X-X to send this letter at our properly noticed October 13, 2015

meeting with a quorum present.

ANC 6B and residents in southeast Capitol Hill have had on-going, lengthy, significant, and

substantive input to the Hine School Planned Unit Development and in August 2012, ANC6B

and Stanton-Eastbanc reached agreement on twenty six areas regarding the mitigation of

potential impacts from construction of the project on the community.

Unfortunately, ANC6B is aware of a number of ongoing violations of terms agreed to in the

construction management agreement. While some issues have been addressed to satisfaction, we

have growing concern with unremedied and repeated or intermittent issues. Some specific issues

include:

Use of Vibratory Hammer on numerous occasions and without notice

o “The Developer hereby agrees that all required piles in the Project Site will be

installed using the drilling method (in lieu of vibratory hammer method) to the

fullest extent possible. In the event that piles must be installed using the vibratory

hammer method, Developer will provide notice to Adjacent Building Owners at

least 48-hours prior to the work being performed.”

Night-time use of generator

o “No electrical generators or compressors will be operated on the Construction Site

on Sundays, or before 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays.”

Saturday work without notice

o “The construction workweek shall be Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m.

until 7:00 p.m., with Saturday (and Sunday subject to special DC Permit) as a

makeup day when a work day is lost because of weather or other circumstances

beyond the control of the Developer.”

Work on site commencing prior to 7:00 AM

o Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2015

o Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Consistent and repeated visible worker parking in neighborhood

o “The Developer shall prohibit construction workers, suppliers, or other

construction-related personnel from parking on the streets and alleys surrounding

the Project Site within this quarter-mile radius.”

o “Parking for all construction-related personnel will be provided within the fenced

boundaries of the Project Site or on satellite lots outside of a one-quarter mile

radius of the project site provided by the General Contractor.”

page 2

No satellite lot has been identified

Excessive and repeated numbers of idling and queuing trucks including blocking of bus

stops

Trucks not adhering to approved DDOT approved routes (intermittent issues)

Inadequate pedestrian and vehicle safety measures through inconsistent use of flagmen

Lack of notice regarding sidewalk closures during fence construction and painting

Nonexistent covered walkway on 7th

Street

Incorrect scope and notice for preconstruction Surveys

Vibration monitors placed in public space without proper notice or permits

Consistent issue with lack of dust control measures taken during Saturday work

ANC6B asks that the developer greatly increase efforts to achieve compliance with the long

negotiated construction management agreement. Further, ANC6B asks that developer share plans

to remedy or mitigate each of the concerns raised. The nearby neighbors are being

disproportionately impacted by the violations the construction management agreement intended

to prevent.

Finally, we applaud the implementation and execution of the construction fence artwork which is

a very positive and visually appealing addition.

We look forward to your response and continued close coordination with your team as the

project moves forward. We encourage you to recognize and further support increased efforts to

mitigate impacts on the community.

Sincerely,

Kirsten Oldenburg

Chair

1 | P a g e

Report of the ANC6B Transportation Committee Meeting October 7, 2015

Commissioners present: Nick Burger, Daniel Chao, Steve Hagedorn, Denise Krepp, James Loots, and Kirsten Oldenburg (chairing) Resident Members present: Laura Jeffords (6B03), Neil King (6B05), and Carol Grissom (6B08) Others present: Andrew Cadmus, resident. Announcement: Commissioner Oldenburg announced that DDOT has scheduled to begin the installation of the 11th Street SE crosswalk on October 19, 2015, and expect the cross walk to be fully operational within two weeks after the start. DDOT Tracking #114510, Virginia Avenue SE Streetscape, CSX Virginia Avenue Tunnel project, Special Public Space Committee hearing—November 12, 2015 Joining the Committee to assist with its discussion of this key community benefit of the VAT project were: Mr. Ravi Ganvir (DDOT Deputy Chief Engineer), Mr. Chuck Gullakson (CSX Assistant VP), Mr. Rob Doolittle (CSX Communications), Mr. Marlon Smoker (CH2M, consultant to DDOT), and Mr. Prakash Patel (Clark/Parsons). DDOT and CSX provided poster boards with renderings of the Streetscape (dated October 7, 2015)1 and handouts that included 8”x17” copies of the renderings of the Streetscape by block and information on street trees and lighting. Committee members first reviewed the Virginia Avenue Streetscape renderings from 2nd Street SE to 9th Street SE. Overall, there was a general consensus that the plans shown were acceptable. Commissioner Burger questioned the small size (2” to 3” caliber) of street trees to be planted. The response was that larger caliber transplanted trees had

a higher mortality rate and took so long to get over transplant shock that within 5 years the smaller caliber trees were more substantial, providing better canopy cover. Commissioner Burger also noted for DDOT and CSX that a new condo project for 801 Virginia Avenue will not be using the two curb cuts shown on the renderings on the Virginia Avenue side of its property but will be asking DDOT for a new curb cut on L Street SE. DDOT/CSX agreed to coordinate with the developer on this. Andrew Cadmus noted that at some intersections bicyclist and pedestrians had separated crossing markings; at others they were combined. DDOT said it would review this and return with a response at the Committee’s

November meeting. On the Virginia Avenue Park section of the renderings, members had various suggestions, including benches, trash cans, and a playground. Commissioner Chao questioned why the dog park had separated small and large dog sections. Commissioner Oldenburg noted that the park once had a basketball court. She also commented that there has been no sidewalk along the southern portion of the park from 10th to 11th Streets. These and other suggestions will be discussed at the community Virginia Avenue Park meeting with DPR on October 15th. The Committee decided not to take a formal position on the Streetscape but will do so at its November 4, 2015, meeting when it can include design aspects for the Park.

1 These latest renderings will be posted on the CSX VAT website.

2 | P a g e

Center City PCS request for support of the removal of the eastbound Metrobus stop on East Capitol at 15th Street SE Joining the Committee for this discussion: Mr. Joe Speight, Principal of Center City PCS, Ms Rachel Skerritt, Principal of Eastern High School, and Amy Jacobi (DDOT). Mr. Speight presented the rationale for the request to remove the bus stop: the congregation every weekday afternoon of unruly students from Eastern High and other schools. This creates an unfavorable situation for Center City elementary students as they depart each afternoon. Center City feels that removal of the bus stop would disburse students to either the stop at 14 th or 17th Street. Principal Skerritt said she was not necessarily opposed to the elimination of the stop but noted that one of their problems in the afternoons is that the MPD Safe Passage officers depart the school too early, leaving Eastern High without that assistance in getting students onto to transportation. Ms Jacobi informed the Committee that there had been a previous effort by WMATA to eliminate this stop to improve performance of the #97 and #B2 bus lines. She also said that the shelter, which is in poor shape, will be removed and there are no plans to replace it. When asked, Ms Jacobi said that the ultimate decision would be made jointly by WMATA and DDOT. Committee members questioned whether it was appropriate to solve these problems by the physical removal of a bus stop, whether doing so would result in a flood of requests to eliminate other problematic stops, and whether they had sufficient information to make a decision. Commissioner Krepp moved (seconded by Commissioner Chao) that the Committee defer a decision for a month she while worked with the schools to get a more comprehensive understanding of the problems and possible solutions. The Committee voted 8-0 to support the motion. DDOT Navy Yard/Union Station Circulator Proposal on Elimination of Stops The Committee, with Ms Jacobi’s help, discussed DDOT’s proposal to eliminate 3 stops along each the southbound and northbound route of the Navy Yard/Union Station Circulator. This proposal was developed by DDOT based on assessment of data and it is now seeking input from the community. The rationale for the stop eliminations is to improve the on time performance of the Circulator route. Commissioner Oldenburg said she had no problems with 2 of the proposed stops but did think the stops at 4 th & M (both directions) ought to be retained since there is a senior apartment building on the north side of that intersection. After some discussion, Commissioner Oldenburg moved (seconded by RM King) that the Committee recommend the Commission support DDOT’s route improvement plan but that the 6th and M Street SE stops be eliminated rather than the 4th & M Street stops and that the Commission support the removal of parking spots along the route that obstruct bus operations. The Committee voted 5-0 in support of the motion.2

2 By the time of this vote, 4 committee members had left the meeting.

1

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B OUTREACH & CONSTITUENT SERVICES TASK FORCE

September 2015 Report

Outreach & Constituent Services Task Force Meeting Date: September 10, 2015 Time: 7:00-8:30 pm Location: Hill Center, 921 Pennsylvania Avenue SE Topics: Education, Public Safety, ANC 6B website Task Force Members in Attendance: Brian Flahaven (chair – 6B09), Nick Burger (6B06) and Resident Members Jessica Kahan (6B06), Elizabeth Schulman (6B05) and Steve Merrill (6B04)

Q&A with Christina Henderson, Director, DC Council Committee on Education

Chair Flahaven introduced Christina Henderson, director of the DC Council’s Committee on Education and deputy chief of staff for Councilmember David Grosso (I-At-Large).

Henderson discussed the committee’s work thus far in 2015, mostly dominated by work on the FY2016 budget. Facing a $300 million cut in the capital budget for education, the committee developed a framework to add some rationality to the school modernization schedule.

The committee is also reviewing the school lunch contract, including visits to schools by Chairman Grosso and committee staff to try out various school lunches.

The committee is also watching the Deputy Mayor for Education’s DCPS-Charter Coordination Task Force closely to see if the group comes up with significant recommendations that will improve coordination between the two sectors.

Attendees voiced concerns about continued delays in Ward 6 school modernizations, particularly at Jefferson Academy and Eliot-Hine Middle Schools. Henderson said she would follow up on repair issues still outstanding at the schools.

Attendees thanked Henderson for her time and participation. Public Safety

The task force discussed continued neighborhood concerns about crime. Chair Flahaven noted that ANC 6B is working to schedule a meeting with MPD First District Commander Jeff Brown to discuss how to improve communication between MPD and residents.

A few attendees suggested the creation of a resident working group to focus on public safety. Such a group could work directly with the commission and MPD. The task force would also like to see a more coordinated effort to tackle the spike in crime between MPD, the Mayor’s Office and various city agencies.

2

The task force discussed the idea of creating a one-pager or list of common offenses and what MPD officers must see/do to make arrests when the offenses occur. This would help residents understand the bounds of what officers can and cannot do when confronted with various situations.

Website

Task force members discussed the ANC 6B website. Ideas for improvement included: o Adding a community resource page with links to various Capitol Hill organizations like CHAMPs,

the BID, Barracks Row Main Street, CHRS, etc. o Adding more photos of landmarks within ANC 6B to the homepage (like Eastern Market). o Improving the various committee checklists designed to help applicants prepare for

presentations in front of various ANC 6B committees. The task force also suggested including specific examples of what we would like to see (ex. a sample google map view for Planning & Zoning Committee meetings).

o Include a brief description of the origin, mission, functions of ANCs on this page, rather than a background page.

o Merge past meeting agendas, minutes, and letters and resolutions so all in the same location. o Provide a list of open neighborhood listservs.

Chair Flahaven asked task force members to help gather critical links for new pages on the site. The goal is to significantly improve the website by the end of 2015.

Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 8:10 pm.

2015 Future Meetings Oct. 15, 2015 Nov. 12, 2015 Dec. 10, 2015

Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee

September 30, 2015

Future Meetings:

The Chair reported that the next two meetings are scheduled for October 21st and November 18th.

Elections:

The Vice Chair reported that elections for Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer will be held at the next meeting.

Marketing:

The Marketing Subcommittee is finalizing an Eastern Market brochure for distribution at local hotels and will meet with Stanton Eastbanc to discuss future joint marketing opportunities.

Market Manager:

Market Manager Barry Margeson announced a Rapid Marketing Assessment Project to be implemented within the next two months.

August revenues totaled $105,764. Three market staff have been hired full time as of August which will provide them with better benefits and stability and will reduce costs slightly. The market distributed thousands of dollars in Produce Plus checks during Fresh Tuesdays. Produce Plus is a locally funded famers’ market incentive program designed to increase access to healthy and nutritious food options for income-eligible District residents as well as to promote the presence and benefits of Farmers’ Markets,

with the ultimate goal of improving public health outcomes.

Merchants & Vendors:

The market is currently developing a process to go forward with the lease negotiations and new permits were just distributed to vendors.

Merchants have complained that events in the North Hall are taking parking from the South Hall and blocking the alley running behind the market, thereby discouraging clients. The merchants are also asking for keys or a card swipe system to gain access to the South Hall.

Capital Improvements Committee:

The Capital Improvements committee recommend the purchase of a PA System and back-up generator as well as funds for secretarial services and paper. The committee also reported that repairs to the brownstone above the pottery barn will entail a $30k assessment and $300k in costs.

Application Advisory Review Committee:

The committee is currently is reviewing applications for vendors.

Tenants Council:

The Tenants Council requested the following:

Market Manager to adjust space allotment at the northwest corner of C & 7th Streets, SE to provide adequate clearance around the handicap curb-cut ramp;

Address increasing problems of load-out vehicular clearance in the driving lane on 7th Street by designating and marking limits for the location of farmer trucks and vendor tents to assure adequate passage required by the fire lane;

Erect a “Road Closed” sign at the alley between 7th & 8th Street an reissue and enforce traffic rules during load-in and load-out on 7th Street;

Advice from EMCAC on identifying the correct body to hear appeals concerning management issued Market Violation Notices.

Mayor’s Resident Member

Jonathan Page was appointed the Mayor’s Resident Member to the Eastern Market Community Advisory

Committee.

Hine Community Advisory Committee (CAC)

Meeting #23 October 2, 2015

Recent & Upcoming Activities:

Work is the alley at the north end between 7th & 8th Streets will continue with the steel plates being removed and asphalt being applied. Work includes tying 8th Street into the water supply line on C Street and into the storm drain.

Saturday work day procedures are being reviewed. 48 hour notice is required and weather delays are based on NOAH predictions. The developer is reviewing the proposed number of Saturday work days and may reduce the number requested. Those days may also be reduced by work longer work days during the week. Hauling subcontractors are again being admonished to stay within the TCP DDOT-approved truck routes.

Excavation should be completed by the end of November 2015. Tower cranes should start to be erected in late October with completion in December. Crane swing agreements will be distributed by October 15th. Building the structure to grade is anticipated for completion in March, 2016 with the above grade structure to be completed by June, 2016. The façade installation will run from May to December, 2016 with unit deliveries and retail/office openings in the second quarter of 2017.

Vibration monitoring reports from ECS & Schanbel will continue to be posted on the project website. Some new vibrations monitors will be installed.

Artwork from local schools has been installed on the construction fence along Pennsylvania Avenue. Clark Construction may install plexi-glass to protect the artwork and may also take digital pictures.

The wood construction fence along 7th Street should be installed in October in co-ordination with the Flea Market vendors and view ports will be provided, probably at D Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.

The temporary solar powered lamps in the covered walkway will be removed and the holes patched. Generators will continue to provide power for temporary lighting and drainage pumps through the excavation phase. Semi-permanent Construction Site lighting will commence after the excavation phase pending PEPCO work.

SEB installed an Open for Business sign at the corner of 7th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue .

Vector control measures are ongoing for rodent control and C Street businesses are advised to contact Matt Harris for assistance. The Eastern Market manager has been asked to remove trash in the alley behind the market.

SEB/Clark Construction have been asked to keep the crosswalks and aprons clean of dirt and to pick up trash.

Construction workers continue to park in the neighborhood in violation of the CMA.

The Pennsylvania Avenue ramp into the construction site should be completed in 2-3 weeks.

(Date) Mayor Muriel Bowser John A. Wilson Building 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC Via Email: Muriel.Bowser@dc.gov Re: Future of RFK Stadium land Dear Mayor Bowser We are extremely concerned with your September 9, 2015 statement to Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners concerning the future of RFK stadium, in which you said that NFL football should return to RFK. This statement was made despite the fact that Events DC has not yet completed its study on future uses of the existing RFK campus. Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B voted (insert) to send this letter at its properly noticed Commission meeting on October 13, 2015 with a quorum present and ask you to meet with ANC 6B residents. In October 2014, Events DC entered into a contract with Brailsford and Dunlavey to complete a study on the RFK stadium property. The study was supposed to be finished in one year with Events DC agreeing to pay $314,000 for the work. The study, however, hasn't been completed and the first public meeting to discuss the study wasn't held until September 16, 2015. Therefore, we are most troubled by the comments you made on September 9th, six days before Events DC first outlined possible uses for the property. We don't understand why you would express a preference for NFL football before the study is complete and before listening to DC residents who live in the vicinity of the RFK property. At the September 16th meeting, attendees overwhelmingly stated that they did not want professional football to return to this area. The team left in 1997 and folks do not understand why city leadership would give DC tax dollars to Dan Snyder. Doesn't he already have a stadium? Neighbors also stated that they don't want to use tax dollars on a facility that will cost over a billion dollars and only be used eight times a year for football. We have a finite amount of tax dollars. Surely, this money could be spent on more important priorities for the city like building affordable housing, improving safety, and fixing our broken mass transportation system. Councilmember Allen told attendees at the September meetings that he doesn't want to see the oceans of asphalt required for NFL parking lots and ANC6B residents agree with him. This land, much of which is in a flood plain, needs to be developed in ways sensitive to the environment that will enable residents to boat along the Anacostia River and to swim and fish once the District’s process to clean up

the river is completed. Before making any more statements concerning professional football, please meet with ABC6B neighbors. They have a lot of good ideas on how to use the land and given their proximity to the property, we strongly recommend that you meet with them. Working with neighbors will help you create the best plan possible for the RFK stadium property, one that will benefit all DC residents.

Sincerely, Kirsten Oldenburg Chair cc: The Honorable Charles Allen, Councilmember for Ward 6 Mr. Gregory O’Dell, President, Events DC

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ENDING HOMELESSNESS AND CLOSING DC GENERAL SHELTER

WHEREAS far too many men, women and children live in our streets and in our shelters; and

WHEREAS far too many families live in poor, unsafe conditions at the deteriorating DC General Hospital campus bordering ANC 6B; and

WHEREAS when it opened, the DC General Emergency Family Homeless Shelter was meant to be temporary; and

WHEREAS instead of working to find suitable housing and shelter options within existing neighborhoods, city leaders have chosen the politically expedient approach of housing hundreds of families in a deteriorating, depressing building totally separated from the surrounding neighborhood and city; and

WHEREAS Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B views housing so many incredibly needy families at DC General, including a large number of families with children, as an outrage and embarrassment to our city and as completely counterproductive to the ultimate goal of ending homelessness; and

WHEREAS ANC 6B strongly supports the closure and replacement of the DC General shelter with smaller-scale shelter cities spread throughout the city; and

WHEREAS since taking office, Mayor Muriel Bowser has made addressing District’s homeless and

housing crisis a top priority of her administration; and

WHEREAS Mayor Bowser and the Council approved a $40 million investment the District’s FY2016

budget to begin funding smaller-scale shelters to replace DC General; and

WHEREAS homelessness in the District is not an intractable problem – it can be solved; and

WHEREAS every neighborhood, including southeast Capitol Hill, has a stake in preventing homelessness and supporting people who experience homelessness.

WHEREAS by committing to action and using proven strategies, the District of Columbia has an opportunity to lead the nation in ending homelessness.

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that ANC 6B supports Mayor Bowser’s pledge to end homelessness

in the District of Columbia; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ANC 6B supports efforts to close and replace DC General with smaller, more dignified private-room emergency housing for families across all 8 Wards.

By a vote of X-X at a publicly noticed meeting on October 13, 2015.

Attest: Daniel Chao, Secretary Date: