Monthly Archives: February 2012

ANC6B Working Group Wrestles with Hine Design Issues – Delays Considering Height Issue Pending Forthcoming Shadow Study

ANC6B Working Group Wrestles with Hine Design Issues – Delays Considering Height Issue Pending Forthcoming Shadow Study

by Larry Janezich

Last Tuesday night the ANC6B Working Group on the Hine Design met to consider recommendations to improve the design of the Hine project, but deferred consideration of the height issue until the results of the shadow study are made available, possibly later this week.  The shadow study is required by the Zoning Commission as part of Stanton/Eastbanc’s application to change the zoning of the site permitting a building height up to 90 feet.  A private consultant, hired by Stanton/Eastbanc, will determine what shadows the building will cast by time of day and time of year.

At the meeting, working group leader Gary Peterson called the height of the proposed development “the elephant in the room.”  Former ANC6B Commissioner Ken Jarboe noted that the building on 7th Street is two stories higher in the current plan than it was in the proposal which the city selected when awarding the bid to Stanton, making it three stories higher than the building housing Le Pain Quotidian across the street.  Jarboe said, “[e]ven with a step down of the building toward C Street, building to the property line creates a canyon effect.”  Peterson agreed with this, saying that “there’s something wrong with the height.”  ANC6B Commissioner Dave Garrison differed, however, saying “it doesn’t look like a canyon to me.  I’m hard pressed to say this is a canyon.”

Also at the meeting, the façade of the 7th Street building came under fire for the windows all being the same size and the confusing attempt to break the single building into three sections to make it look less monolithic and more human in scale.  While the working group seemed to agree with these goals, the feeling was strong that the design efforts to do this were unsuccessful.

Peterson put to rest the idea that the development might be set back from 7th Street to encompass a view of Eastern Market from the Metro plaza as “a dead letter,” saying the National Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Review Board were opposed.   He also shot down any idea of having an entrance or exit to underground parking on D Street or Pennsylvania Avenue, saying because the city will oppose a curb cut, “it’s not going to happen.”

The group will meet next on Thursday, March 1, when the shadow study might be available.    Peterson said he hoped it Stanton/Eastbanc would put it on the Hine website for viewing by the community.  There was no discussion at the design working group of the 3-D scale model, reported by Stanton Eastbanc to be delivered from China mid-March.

The next meeting of ANC’s Subcommittee on the Hine PUD process will be on Wednesday, February 29, at 7:00pm in Hill Center.


Filed under Uncategorized

The Week Ahead …..

The Week Ahead …..

by Larry Janezich

Monday, February 27

ANC6B Hine PUD Subcommittee Design Working Group meets 5:00 – 7:00pm at Kirby House, 420 10th Street, SE.  

Tuesday, February 28

ANC 6B Executive Committee Meeting.  8:00pm, The Hill Center.

Tuesday, February28

ANC6B Hine PUD Subcommittee Retail Working Group meets.  Time and place TBA. 

Wednesday, February 29

The Sub-committee on the Hine School Development will meet at 7:00pm at  the Hill Center to discuss the starting points for amenities and benefits suggestions.  

Wednesday, February 29

Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee meets at 7:00pm in the North hall of Eastern Market.

Wednesday, February 29

Councilmember Wells will hold a public roundtable on nominees to the Historic Preservation Review Board.  1:00 pm, Room 123, of the John A. Wilson Building 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

The nominees are:

Andrew Aurbach

Joseph E. Taylor

Robert C. Sonderman

Gretchen K. Pfaehler

Graham Davidson

Rauzia R. Ally

Thursday, March 1

ANC Commissioner Brian pate invites you to attend a Single Member District community meeting at 7:00pm in Southeast Library, lower level.  Topics for discussion include possible expansion of the Performance Parking Pilot, update on Eastern Market legislation, update on the hine development, update on derelict properties and sidewalks and alleys.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Deputy Mayor’s Office Blames Unnamed Federal Agency for Hine Project Delay – Chair Kwame Brown Cites Pressure on Council to Fast Track Hine Project

Deputy Mayor’s Office Blames Unnamed Federal Agency for Hine Project Delay -Chair Kwame Brown Cites Pressure on Council to Fast Track Hine Project

by Larry Janezich

Yesterday, Corey Lee, Hine Project Manager for the Office of Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, was asked by Kwame Brown, Chair of the City Council’s Committee on the Whole,  to explain why little on the project had happened since Council rushed to approve it in 2010.  Lee offered that this project is “pretty complex” and claimed that delay was related to having to “figure out what other federal entities who have tried to reach in and whether they had any jurisdiction over the project.”  Lee said, the agency in question “is slipping my mind right now.”  He went on to explain that it was “really a question of oversight with respect to design, and whether another agency would have input and how that would – and how that would impact the townhouses….”

This is the first time that the specter of a federal agency inserting itself into the Hine design process has come to the attention of the neighborhood and community organizations following the development of the Hine project.  It has been clear that the City Council has expedited approval of the project.  As Brown characterized the imperative; “we’ve got to move this right now, the whole world was going to fall apart if we don’t move the surplus and disposition.”

Recently, it has also been clear that Office of Planning has been pushing the project through the PUD process.  Last week, the Zoning Commission heard the Office of Planning agree that Stanton/Eastbanc’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) application on the Hine Project was “unsettled” and perhaps not quite ready for a final hearing before the Zoning Commission.   None the less, the Office of Planning recommended that the project be moved forward to a final hearing, based on assurances in an “animated discussion with the developer” that the project would be ready for that hearing when it was scheduled.

Brown’s questions were framed in the context of the Council being told that the deal would fall apart, unless the project were approved without delay, and yet little had happened since council approval.  Yesterday, Brown was told that the reason the City Council had to fast track approval of the Hine Project in 2010; the developer, Stanton/Eastbanc, refused to commit $3 million on design work for the project until the Council had approved it.

Excerpts from the hearing appear below.

Committee of the Whole Hearing today, Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 7:55:00 in the hearing tape, Kwame Brown asks Corey Lee about Hine status:

Lee:  Right now the Hines [sic] Jr HS project has recently been set down for zoning hearing for PUD.  We have gone through a pretty intensive community engagement process over the past 12 months or so.  Gone before HPRB.  There’s a small group of citizens who are not in favor of the project, but it’s very nominal.  At this point we are looking forward to a great project.

KB:  What happens now?  I mean, the reason I ask the question is because what we received from the committee is that we got this, we’ve got to move this right now, the whole world was going to fall apart if we don’t move the surplus and disposition and then when we move it, it just stops.  Right?  Like, nothing kind of happens.  Where are we now because the world was going to fall apart a little while ago?

Lee: “Well, I’m not familiar with the world falling apart…

KB:  I mean in terms of it had to hurry up and get out of the Council, if it didn’t then the whole deal was going to fall apart. So we did that a little while ago and  I’m just like OK….?

Lee:  It’s a pretty complex project, so it takes quite a bit of time as opposed to some of the smaller projects that you’ve mentioned today.  This is a project that we’ve had to figure out what other Federal entitites that have tried to reach in and whether they’ve had any kind of jurisdiction over the project.

KB:  Over the Hine school?

Lee:  That is correct.  Because it is a former school site.

KB:   What part would the Feds have?  I mean…

Lee:  Well, we had to make that argument  through working with OP, working with HPRB (Historic Preservation Review Board), to insure that just based on the location and the ownership structure, and also with Hine being in that historic overlay along Pennsylvania Avenue, whether or not somebody else would have the ability to reach in.  I’m actually…the name of the agency is slipping my mind right now.

KB:  The reason I asked that question is because when the world was falling apart and I had hurry up and move it, all that had been taken care of.  They told me everything was taken care of, it was ready to go. And now and I’m like, well I thought, a lot of that had been settled, because why would we surplus or disposition something that we don’t even know if we can surplus and disposition because it might not even be ours.

Lee:  It wasn’t a question of surplus or disposition, it was oversight with respect to design.  Whether another agency would have…how that would affect the timeline.

KB:  So this was more about the design.

Senthil Sankaran (Director of Development) interjected here:  Correct.   What you heard Corey indicate all came out through the design and development process by which the developer has refined his design over the last year since the approval of the surplus disposition.

KB:  Two years, almost two years.  It’s almost two years.

Senthil Sankaran:  Sorry, almost two years.  They are on schedule per the LDA that was negotiated in which they were recently set down by the Zoning Commission for their PUD hearing.  PUD, depending on the workload of the commission, could be six to twelve months.  After which they’ll be able to achieve a financial settlement and a groundbreaking by [crosstalk]…July 20, 2013 is their groundbreaking, which will keep it within the terms of the disposition agreement.

KB:  So that’s on schedule.  Was that part of the “Moving Projects Forward?” [crosstalk discussion of why Hine was not included in list of projects going to groundbreaking in 2012]  …. Mr. Jackson just told me the developer wouldn’t pay the money until the Council approved it.  So that’s why we had to approve it, so the developer could spend on the design work the $3 million dollars.  So, I got the answer to that.

View the hearing video here:   Go to 7:54:10


Filed under Uncategorized

Hine Critic Unhappy Wells’ Office Gave Home Phone Number to Developer

Hine Critic Unhappy Wells’ Office Gave Home Phone Number to Developer

by Larry Janezich

Some 20 hours ago, a neighbor of the Hine project tweeted Councilmember Tommy Wells to complain that his office had passed on the critic’s home phone number to Stanton Development, apparently to allow the developer an opportunity to answer the critic’s questions regarding public space in the Hine Development.

The initial tweet below refers to a flyer distributed last Saturday by members of the Eastern Market Metro Community Association.  The flyer urged residents to contact Councilmember Tommy Wells and urge him to support the community’s demands to: “Cut Back the Size of the Development, Don’t Let Retail Overtake Residential Areas, Fight Loss of Open Space, Preserve Space for the Flea Market.”

The series of three tweets are as follows:

Dear Tommy, have u seen this? (photo of flyer attached) Please help rather than giving @Stanton_Dev everyone’s number who calls, like u did me.

And no, @TommyWells and @Stanton_Dev, I did not make the flyers. But most in neighborhood feel dev too big-detraction from @EasternMarketDC

Honestly, neighbors are SHOCKED that you gave @Stanton_Dev my home number because I was curious about public space involved. @TommyWells


Filed under Uncategorized

The Week Ahead…..

The Week Ahead…..

by Larry Janezich

Tuesday, February 21

ANC 6B Bylaws Review Working Group meets 6:30pm – 9:00pm at Hill Center.  ANC6B continues to work on revising and updating ANC bylaws.  This second meeting of the working group will focus will be on Articles VI – XVI of the ANC 6B bylaws (includes sections on Relations with the DC Government, Committee Meetings, Meetings with Other Commissions, Executive Committee, Committees, and Financial Affairs). 

Chair:  Brian Flahaven

Wednesday, February 22

ANC 6B Outreach & Constituent Services Task Force meets 7:00pm – 8:00pm at Hill Center. 

The meeting will feature a discussion on 311, the City’s customer service call center, with Mrs. Wanda Gattison from the District’s Office of Unified Communications.   Chair:  Brian Pate

Wednesday, February 22

ANC6B’s Hine Subcommittee’s Design Working Group will meet  from 4:00pm to 6:00pm at the Capitol Hill Restoration Society Office, 420 10th Street SE.
Thursday February 23 (This is important)

ANC6B Subcommittee on the Hine PUD Process meets at 7:00pm at Hill Center to discuss benefits, amenities and mitigation the community might receive from the developer for the impact of the Hine project on the community.  The community is urged to attend. 

What’s happening? 

ANC6B appointed a Subcommittee of Commissioners and resident members to oversee the application of Stanton/Eastbanc to change the zoning at the Hine site to accommodate the greater height, mass, and density the project will require. Part of this process anticipates the developer making concessions to the community on the project, perhaps changing the scale and design of the project or providing benefits, amenities or mitigation instead. 

The Subcommittee has resolved itself into working groups to consider various parts of the application which deserve special attention. 

One of these – the Benefits and Amenities Working Group – will coordinate the requests for mitigation, benefits, and amenities forwarded by the other working groups and negotiate with the developer to achieve resolution of outstanding issues.  Thursday night’s meeting is the first of perhaps several meetings to discuss what benefits, mitigation, and amenities should come to the community.

The other working groups are as follows:

Design – will concentrate on the project’s architectural components and represent the community in an effort to make the project an outstanding architectural contribution to the community, which many say it fails to do in its current form.

Public Space – will work to determine how the loss of open space (flea market venue, dog run, basketball courts) can be mitigated or amenities received therefore.  Space for continuation of the flea market in its current form is a primary issue for this group. 

Retail – tasked with working with the developer to achieve a retail mix in accordance with terms and intentions stated in the zoning change application.  A recent survey available on the Subcommittee’s website, provided some feedback regarding community preferences. 

Transportation – will consider transportation and pedestrian safety issues raised by the project and coordinate their resolution with the DC Department of Transportation.  The Transportation Working Group will also work out an understanding with the developer about how to minimize the impact of the construction phase on the community. 


Ivan Frishberg – ANC6B, Chair of Subcommittee and Benefits & Amenities Working Group Co-Leader

 Brian Pate – ANC6B, Vice-Chair of Subcommittee and Public Space Working Group Leader


ANC Commissioners

Jared Critchfield

Dave Garrison (Benefits & Amenities Working Group Co-Leader)

Carol Green

Kirsten Oldenburg (Transportation Working Group Leader)

Resident Members

Julia Robey Christian (Retail Working Group Leader)

Monte Edwards, Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee – EMCAC, (Pubic Space Working Group Leader)

Ken Jarboe, Member-At-Large

Bill Pate, Hine School North Neighbors

Gary Peterson, Capitol Hill Restoration Society (CHRS)

Stephen Sweeney, Eyes on Hine

Roger Tauss, Eastern Market Metro Community Association (EMMCA)

Comments Off on The Week Ahead…..

Filed under Uncategorized

How The Hine Project Has Changed Since The Plan Was Selected by The DC Deputy Mayor’s Office

How The Hine Project Has Changed Since The Plan Was Selected by The DC Deputy Mayor’s Office

by Larry Janezich

Last Monday, the Zoming Commission voted unanimously to “set down” or recommend that Stanton/Eastbanc’s request for a Hine site zoning change – its Planned Unit Development (PUD) application – be afforded a final hearing before the Commission in no fewer than 60 days.  Actually, it is more likely to occur in the next 90 or even 120 days.

The PUD process affords the community an opportunity to raise concerns and provides a process for improving the project in terms of its impact on the community.  Part of this process involves benefits and amenities and mitigations provided by the developer.

ANC6B has appointed a Subcommittee comprised of certain commissioners and resident members to analyze the PUD process and to come up with a list of amenities and mitigations and to negotiate with the developer on behalf of the community to achieve desired results.

Some of the major concerns of the community include its height and mass and how much the development has changed since the bid for development was awarded to Stanton/Eastbanc by the Deputy Mayor’s Office for Planning and Economic Development.  The following chart, created for the ANC Subcommittee by former ANC6B Commissioner Ken Jarboe reflects how the project has changed over time.

Best and Final Offer     HPRB Submission    PUD Submission     Term Sheet                        3/1/09                             2/25/11                     11/23/11

Sq. Feet     401,648                          427,530                        464,278                    405,793

Retail          48,285                             45,530                              46,699                      49,200

Office           213,197                           151,350                                163,392               211,999

Residential   140,166                           230,650                            254,187              144,594

No. of Units        150                                   168                                      158                      132

Parking Spaces   391                                   270                                      260                      201

(The figures under “term sheet” reflect what the developer agreed to provide after being awarded the bid by the city.)

Among the changes Jarboe selected for emphasis in a report to the Subcommittee were the following:

Changed shape of the public space from a plaza mid-C Street to a setback of the residential building at the corner of 7th and C Streets, and access to the interior courtyard (originally accessible to the public it is now reserved for residents and occupants of the building);

Increased height of the 8th and D Street residential building;

Added a 7th story (ten feet) to the commercial building at Pennsylvania Avenue and 7th Street;

Added a 5th story (eleven feet) to the residential building at 7th and C Streets;

Removal from the project of participation by the Shakespeare Theater;

Decrease in parking spaces from 391 to 260.

The height and mass of the project are controversial, with many in the community convinced that the development will dwarf and dominate the historic Eastern Market and ultimately work to the disadvantage of the small independent retailers on 7th Street as well as the residences on nearby streets.  Others, some of whom characterize themselves as new-urbanists, support all the density and height the site next to a transportation hub will allow.  Both sides speak from a expectation and perception rather than from any clear ability to visualize the finished project.  That vision will become more clear in mid-March, when the developer will finally produce a three dimensional model of the project extending to one-half block  on each side of the site.  It’s perhaps noteworthy that the developer has resisted pressure to produce the model, relenting only after the Office of Planning urged them to provide one.  Equally noteworthy, the developer elected to present a single graphic of the Hine development in last month’s Hill Rag showing the project from its lowest perspective, minimizing the perception of both its height and mass.

The city, after alreadygranting the developer a one year delay, is pressuring the developer to begin construction as soon as possible.  Some Zoning Commissioners at Monday night’s hearing – as well as the Office of Planning – were skeptical that the project in its current form was ready to move to the final stage.  Despite those reservations and with assurances from the developer that the project will be ready by the time of the final hearing when scheduled, the project has moved to the final stages of approval.

ANC6B’s Subcommittee on the Hine PUD will meet next Thursday, February 23, at 7:00pm in Hill Center to discuss a preliminary list of amenities and mitigations with which to begin negotiations with the developer.  The meeting is open to the public.  The Subcommittee’s website can be found here:


Filed under Uncategorized

Zoning Commission Approves Hine Project for Final Hearing on Zoning Change – Decision on Zoning Likely in May or June

Zoning Commission Approves Hine Project for Final Hearing on Zoning Change – Decision on Zoning Likely in May or June

by Larry Janezich

The five member DC Zoning Commission (ZC) voted unanimously tonight to approve (or “set down” for a final hearing) Stanton/Eastbanc’s request for a zoning change for the Hine site that would permit greater height and density for the project.  That hearing before the ZC could occur in 60 days, but is more likely to happen in May or June.  The decision on a final date will depend on how soon Stanton/Eastbanc is able to resolve the outstanding issues that arose from the current and earlier reviews, including the residual and as yet unaddressed concerns from the Historic Preservation Review Board.

Today, five ANC6B Commissioner’s sent a letter to the Office of Planning (OP), saying it had not been clear to ANC6B that once the ZC set down the request for a final hearing, changes to Stanton Eastbanc’s proposed new zoning (C-2-B, a business/retail multi-use classification) would no longer be possible.

OP’s representative, Jennifer Steingasser, who presented OP’s set down recommendation to the Commission, noted that the letter stated that it did not represent the official position of ANC6B.  Steingasser appeared to interpret the letter as a request for a delay in tonight’s hearing, likely because the only way to address the issue raised would be a delay.  She said that OP felt they could not withdraw the request at the last moment.

Pressed by ZC Chair Anthony Hood whether the request for a delay would have been granted if it had come earlier, the OP representative said “it probably would not have, based on the issues raised in the letter.”

Zoning Commissioner Peter May noted there are a lot of unusual things about the project, and cited the reopening of C Street, relief from the restriction on mechanical penthouse height, below grade retail, and a list of items OP has specifically said need to be addressed.   May said that the whole project “feels unsettled to me” and asked Steingasser why OP felt it was ready to recommend a set down rather than wait a month or two.

Steingasser said she did not disagree but said that the project is being driven by specific markers in the timeline set by the City Council, and that the developers don’t want to go back to the city Council for an extension.  Stanton/Eastbanc has already been granted a one year extension by the Council.  Steingasser went on to say that OP has had an “animated discussion with the developer” and received assurances that the outstanding issues will have been resolved by the date of the final hearing.

Issues which seemed to be of most concern to Zoning Commissioners included massing and height of the building on 7th Street and the retail plan.  There was a consensus that a better retail plan was needed; the proposed possible below-grade retail for the project was regarded with skepticism by more than one commissioner, with some saying they had not seen it work well elsewhere and those who had attempted it were forced to return to the Zoning Commission and seek new classification.

Parking for the project was also a concern, with Zoning Commissioner Marcie Cohen wondering why “all those parking spaces were needed in a project so close to Metro and bus lines.”  May  asked whether OP had determined the eligibility of residents for residential parking permit, noting parking issues in the neighborhood.  Steingasser said the office would consult with DDOT on the issue, and Chair Hood noted that DDOT has changed position on this a number of times and that with a new DDOT in place the policy needed to be clarified.

A majority of the Commission seemed to feel that they needed to better understand the context of the building within the neighborhood.  Other specific concerns included the concentration of the affordable housing in one building, and the management of curb-side loading for retail.

Neither the developers nor the community participated in the set-down hearing.  Once the final hearing is scheduled, members of the public and affected community groups can appear before the Commission to testify.


Filed under Uncategorized

The Week Ahead…..

The Week Ahead…..

 by Larry Janezich

 Monday, February 13

The Zoning Commission will hold the first of two hearings at 6:30pm.  This will be a conversation between the developer, Stanton/Eastbanc, and the Commission; the public will not be permitted to participate.  The public will participate at the second and final hearing which is likely to occur in May or June.  Both hearings will be held at the Zoning Commission at 441 4th Street NW, in Room 220 South.

Tuesday, February 14

ANC6B meets at 7:00pm, The Hill Center.

Watch for:

Compromise on Sun Trust Rock ‘n Roll USA Marathon proposal to ban parking on East Capitol between 3rd Street and 11th Street from Saturday night March 16 until mid-day Sunday March 17 to accommodate the 21,000 runners in the run.

Report on Hine School PUD Subcommittee report including reports on the meetings of its working groups (retail, public space, transportation, design, and budget & amenities) with Stanton/Eastbanc. 

 Resolution regarding rules for activities in Eastern Market’s North Hall.

Comments Off on The Week Ahead…..

Filed under Uncategorized

DC Office of Planning Offers Scant Criticism of Hine Development – Initial “Set Down Report” Downplays Community’s Concerns

DC Office of Planning Offers Scant Criticism of Hine Development – Initial “Set Down Report” Downplays Community’s Concerns                

by Larry Janezich

The Office of Planning (OP) has issued its “Set Down Report” on the Hine Planned Unit Development (PUD) project, recommending that the Zoning Commission proceed to a public hearing to begin the process for final approval of Hine developer’s request for a zoning change to permit greater height and density for the project.   The earliest that final Zoning Commission hearing could happen would be in April, but a May or even a June date is more likely.

The Planned Unit Development (PUD) process is designed to encourage high quality development that provides public benefits when development requires zoning changes.  Generally, in exchange for the zoning changes which permit greater height and density, the process requires that a development’s impact on the surrounding area be “either favorable, capable of being mitigated, or acceptable given the quality of public benefits in the project.”  

Occasionally a Set Down Report takes issue with a development, recommending changes to the proposal before the Zoning Commission proceeds any further with the case.  Yet, in the case of Hine, OP did not quarrel with the density of either the residential or the commercial building, which it deemed “moderate.”  Nor does it take issue with the maximum building heights – 54 feet for the 8th Street residential, 64 feet at 8th and D, 88 feet for the 7th and PA office building – down to 51 feet nearer C Street, and 74 feet for the residential building at 7th and C, diagonally across from Eastern Market.  Likewise the report raised no issue with the 47 foot maximum height of the North Residential building.  As residents have pointed out, the Hine proposal as it currently stands is the largest development to come to any historic district in the DC. 

Thus far in the PUD process, in addition the height and density, residents have expressed concern over aesthetics, parking issues, loss of green space, space for the flea market, ambiguity over the control of C Street, and the prospect of retail development on the here-to-fore exclusively residentially-zoned 8th Street.   

The Zoning Commission will hold the first of two hearings on the PUD process on Monday, February 13, at 6:30pm.  This will be a conversation between the developer, Stanton/Eastbanc, and the Commission; the public will not be permitted to participate.  The public will participate at the second and final hearing which is likely to occur in May or June.  Both hearings will be held at the Zoning Commission at 441 4th Street N.W., Washington, DC 20001 in Room 220 South.


Filed under Uncategorized

Neighbor Offers Alternate Hine Concept

Neighbor Offers Alternate Hine Concept
This is an example of how the Hine Junior High School site could be re-developed for the long-term benefit of all.  The important point is that there is no need to sacrifice open public space, natural light or a livable, walkable environment for the sake of higher density.  The attached concept does not exceed four stories in height and it still provides 75% of the floor space of the Stanton/Eastbanc proposal. Commercial and residential uses can be separated without isolating existing residential areas. Barracks Row and Metro Plaza can be creatively linked to the Eastern Market with shaded, commercial arcades along Pennsylvania Avenue, 7th Street and C Street.  The narrow north parcel should remain public space and would provide an adequate area for the weekend Flea Market without additional street closures.  Alleys should be included in the site to provide better traffic flow and alternative access. If community leaders and developers are willing to be creative and open-minded, there are better solutions that can satisfy the needs and desires of everyone. Please give this your consideration and support.


Filed under Uncategorized