Wells: “Opportunity to Change Hine Project Mass and Height Has Not Passed” – 8th Street Neighbors List Top Priorities
by Larry Janezich
On Wednesday night, 25 nearby 8th Street neighbors of the Hine Project met with Councilmember Tommy Wells in Eastern Market’s North Hall to list their priorities for the Hine Project. This comes as Stanton-Eastbanc seeks Historic Preservation Review Board approval of their plan for the project. .
The five top priorities listed are as follows:
1) Keep 8th Street free of retail, 2) limit residential buildings to R4 zoning and 40 foot heights, 3) limit the north building to residential use only, 4) protect resident’s National Environment Policy Act compliance rights regarding noise studies and other environmental impacts, and 5) provide an opportunity for wider community engagement, including construction of a three-dimensional model (in community context) that can be put on public view for comment and questions.
Much of the discussion concerned the changing size and mass of the project. Wells assured the audience that the opportunity for revisiting those issues had not passed and stressed that the PUD process is the place to begin that conversation. That PUD process is not likely to start until 2012.
The “Development Program” section of the Term Sheet for the Disposition of Hine which specifies criteria for residential space, office space, retail space and parking states, “Throughout the PUD process, changes in the Development Program may be made with the consent of the District.”
The “Schedule of Performance” from the Term Sheet is as follows:
PUD Submission: May 2011 (ed. note: now looks unlikely before of 2012)
Closing: July 2012
Commencement of Construction: September 2012
Completion of Construction: September 2014
The term sheet states that the “Schedule of Performance” with estimated dates may be amended and extended with the approval of the city. It seems certain that the request for delay in PUD Submission will occur, with a resulting push-back in the other performance dates.
CAPITOL HILL CORNER 
1) Keep 8th Street free of retail,
What does this mean? If residents want most of the retail to avoid 8th St, I understand that. But keeping it free of retail seems unreasonable. Does that mean that retail space fronting on Pennsylvania Ave at the corner of 8th and Penn can’t wrap around the corner? That would be a recipe for a bad retail space and is an unreasonable request.
2) limit residential buildings to R4 zoning and 40 foot heights,
What does this mean, as well? This is a mixed use development, a purely residential building isn’t in the cards. The architects have prepared plenty of documents showing that the already modest proposed heights are perfectly reasonable both for the context of the site as well as the historic district.
3) limit the north building to residential use only,
Again, why? What possible benefit would there be to breaking up what could be a nice retail street along 7th from Penn to North Carolina? The C Street ‘North Building’ is a key link here.
If people would like the retail in that section to be focused towards 7th and not 8th, that’s understandable – but the outright prohibition is, again, an unreasonable request.
4) protect resident’s National Environment Policy Act compliance rights regarding noise studies and other environmental impacts,
On what grounds? The PUD process isn’t sufficient?
5) provide an opportunity for wider community engagement, including construction of a three-dimensional model (in community context) that can be put on public view for comment and questions.
Again, the PUD process isn’t sufficient?
Alex,
This project doesn’t exist at the intersection of 8th and Penn. It does exist at 7th and Penn and 8th and D.
When studying a project and voicing your opinions I find it valuable to be precise.
I have to say that keeping 8th Street 100% residential seems reasonable and, more than that, should be expected. To my knowledge it has always been that way (north of Penn) and it should remain that way. Retail on 7th, sure. Retail on Penn, sure.
8th and D, thanks for the correction.
Either way, that particular corner is crucial to fostering a strong connection between 8th street south of Pennsylvania and 7th Street north of Penn. It will help activate the Eastern Market Metro plaza.
Having and active retail facade fronting onto the square and the south facade of the building at the corner of 8th and D will be a huge element in making this a successful building.
Corner retail spaces in particular are extremely valuable. Having that retail front onto D St, but not allowing any frontage on 8th is unreasonable in my mind. “Frontage” doesn’t need to mean separate retail spaces and new entrances, but it’s imperative that the permeability of the space and the visibility of the retail area be able to round the corner – ergo, a complete prohibition on retail frontage (the use of the word frontage is key there) is unreasonable.
I love how its always the ‘next’ thing is what will make this a successful building.
What a slippery slope those arguments become.
In my opinion.
This is NIMBYISM. This is on a six lane thoroughfare across from the metro. There is no reason to keep this small or to micromanage the hell out of this project. If you want retail on Barracks Row and in this area you need more people – you need density.
Alex B.,
Before jumping to unfounded conclusions about the corner of “8th and D” being crucial to the entire enterprise, I’d urge you to use the DC Office of Zoning tool your pals at GGW publicized at http://maps.dcoz.dc.gov/# to get an insight into how the neighborhood works to link Eastern Market and Barracks Row.
The commercial zone in this area, CHC/C-2-A (a Capitol-friendly overlay of C-2-A) is carefully drawn to carry commercial eastward down both sides of Pennsylvania Ave. to Sq. 901 (Hine site), north up 7th to capture Eastern Market and the retail across 7th street from Eastern Market, and south across the southern border of the Eastern Market Metro Plaza along the 700 block of D Street to 8th Street and beyond that to Pennsylvania Avenue to the east.
To the east of Sq 901 (Hine site) on the north side of Pennsylvania Avenue, 8th Street is residential. Note with special attention that the portion of D Street in the 700 block north of Pennsylvania Avenue, and then along the 800 block of D Street, is zoned residential.
That zoning decision was made for a good reason. The D Street segment south of Metro Plaza is what carries commercial over to 7th Street and Eastern Market. The D Street segment north of Metro Plaza and along the north side of the triangle park in the 800 block is residential. See? The commercial link between Barracks Row and Eastern Market goes along the south side of Pennsylvania, while 8th Street and D Street on the north side of Pennsylvania is residential.
Now that Concerned Citizen has pointed out the details of the southern border of Sq. 901 (Hine site) to you, please examine that southern border closely. Only the western 45% of the south frontage of Sq. 901 is or should be commercial. The eastern 55% of the south frontage of Sq. 901 is or should be residential.
How do I “know” that? Because I look north to Sq. 900, north of Sq. 901 (the Hine site), and I see Sq. 900 has been divided, with its western half commercial (the merchants along 7th St. facing Eastern Market) while the eastern half of Sq. 900 is residential, keeping 8th Street strictly residential throughout the 200 block and on up 8th Street.
Sq. 901 (Hine site) should be divided to be compatible with that pattern–its western 45% should be high and massive and commercial, from Pennsylvania Avenue to North Carolina, while its eastern 55% should be strictly residential.
I’d agree with your Point 3 that the same division should especially apply to the North Building, which is the only part of this develop that leaps across a street and actually sits in Sq. 900 (once C Street goes through again)….the North Building should be commercial on its western end and residential on its eastern end.
The overall pattern for development of Sq. 901 (Hine site) could allow lots of residential on all of 8th and all of D Streets, lots and lots and lots of office space and retail on the rest of the site, and a tall residential building at the corner of 7th and C Street, and yet be perfectly compatible with the historic district.
Don’t you agree?
Thanks for following this so closely and providing answers. Hine project has turned into a guessing game. I live on 8th between Independence and C. It will make all the difference to me if I can not longer see sunsets from my front windows. Height matters most, no fee for residents parking for residents in apt buildings so on street parking does not become impossible. Designs I have seen had nothing to recommend them. Amy is very well regarded for other work, but as a newcomer I think we’d be better off having a desigh competition.
@Trulee
That’s some impressive zoning sluething, but I can’t say it proves anything about what is either natural for the site or best for a successful development. I could just as easily note that almost the entirety of Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to Barney Circle is zoned commercial.
Furthermore, zoning for the sake of zoning isn’t anything sacred. We’re not protecting the code for the sake of words on paper – the code is meant to protect the city – and this part of the city predates the zoning code by decades. I’m not sure what evidence you think that brings to the table.
From my perspective, there is no functional difference between the project’s south facade between 7th and 8th. That entire face should be retail, regardless of if it fronts on Penn or on D. So, no, I do not agree. There’s no reason to think that retail shouldn’t wrap around both sides of the Metro Plaza and connect Barracks Row to 7th street as much as possible. If 800 block of D residents are concerned, 8th Street itself ought to provide the buffer. I don’t have any problem with focusing that retail southward from the 700 block of D/Penn, but to deny any wrap-around and push for an absolute prohibition of any retail frontage along 8th St is unreasonable.
@ Alex B., you are right. No one should protect the zoning code for the sake of words on paper. Maybe your best course would be to change the zoning code to make your vision legal and permissible.
This neighborhood does predate the zoning code. And historically, since the 1780s, commercial activity came up 8th Street from the Anacostia River, turned left at 8th Street, then proceeded up Pennsylvania Ave to the Capitol. That’s why commercial activities are on the south side Pennsylvania Avenue on the rectangle Pennsylvania Avenue bisects diagonally, formed by 7th, 9th and the two D Streets. This pattern still works well because coming north from Barracks Row, commercial activity can go west along the 700 block of D Street (odd numbers) up the west side of that rectangle along 7th Street to Eastern Market and to the merchants across 7th Street from Eastern Market.
That historic pattern is memorialized in the zoning code, which makes all of 8th and the 700 and 800 blocks of D Street (even numbers) north of Pennsylvania Avenue residential. I understand you have a strong opinion that the historic pattern should be changed. I’m just asking you to be a little humble and recognize that most people from 1780-2011 took the opposite view. No one never hashed this out in detail before, because as you may know, Sq 901 (Hine property) has been a school property since at least 1862, maybe longer. So now we have to hash it out.
You should recognize that you would be the only person arguing that the ground floor retail on D Street north of Pennsylvania Ave and up 8th Street is essential to the project. Even the developer refers to this building at 8th and D as a “residential building.” At community discussions, the developer states they’d rather keep the entire building residential, but doubt they’d be able to sell ground floor residential units at this corner, so they stuck ground floor retail there instead. (The realtor who recently sold a ground floor town house less than 200 feet away from his location for about $1 million might dispute the developers’ gloomy notion about the market for ground floor residential at this location.)
Nonetheless, you have your opinions. As you can see on the zoning map, if you want to see your vision realized, it’s up to you to get the zoning changed from what is now on the books for 8th Street and this 700 block of D Street (even numbers). That will take some time. I hope for your sake you get your way before construction begins, because otherwise your opinion won’t matter–what’s on the zoning books will determine what’s allowed. No rush, however, as construction probably won’t start until 2015.
I am happy to, as Alex states, be “unreasonable” by siding with those that think retail on D is inappropriate. It should provide a transition to the residential blocks east and north of the site. And as the building on Penn vs on D are very different in appearance retail shouldn’t be tacked onto the 8th St building as an 11th hour decision because of an unfounded fear of not being able to sell first floor residential units. The entirety of the rest of the proposed 8th St building is residential.
Since Alex likes to proclaim himself the arbiter of what is reasonable or not I think a quote is welcome.
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
George Bernard Shaw
I am very happy to be an unreasonable man.
@Trulee:
At community discussions, the developer states they’d rather keep the entire building residential, but doubt they’d be able to sell ground floor residential units at this corner, so they stuck ground floor retail there instead.
That tells me a great deal about what kind of space the corner of 8th and D is begging to be. That’s the kind of space that’s naturally made for retail – even if only the quiet kind of use like a doctor’s office. It’s the kind of space in a building that is just begging to be public in some way.
Community Disrespect
While I do have some issues with the design(s) being proposed for the Hine Redevelopment, my primary issue is the disrespect for the neighborhood shown by Stanton. They were chosen from a group of architects/developers, in part, on the basis of a proposed design. Now, months later, they are proposing a design that bears little resemblance to the one provided in the original competition. This does not appear to be “tweaking” the design because of changes in the economic climate. This looks like Stanton saying, we have the project and we can do whatever we want to maximize our profits. As one of my neighbors put it, it feels like a bait and switch.
I think we should be looking to the other designs originally submitted rather than being forced to compromise on something we might never have considered in the first place.