Author Archives: ljjanezich

The Ugly Mug on Saturday Afternoon

Residents Feel Left Out of Negotiations on Ugly Mug Settlement Agreement

ANC6B​ Poised to Approve the Mugs’ Proposed Expansion

by Larry Janezich

Thursday night, ANC6B’s Alcohol Beverage Control Committee brushed aside neighbors’ request for a month’s continuance based on complaints that they’d had no part in negotiations on a Settlement Agreement between ANC6B and the Ugly Mug, voting instead to forward the agreement to the full ANC next week where it is likely to be approved.

As previously reported (http://bit.ly/ZrJ7lp), last year the ANC voted against the planned expansion and the sliding glass roof over an “atrium” based on overwhelming neighborhood opposition, bolstered by photographs demonstrating the Ugly Mug’s failure as a good neighbor.  That opposition resulted in ABRA scheduling a protest hearing for February 25 to hear complaints of three parties of protesters:  ANC6B, a group of 16 residential neighbors, and businesses adjoining the Ugly Mug.

Approval of a Settlement Agreement at ANC 6B’s upcoming Tuesday night meeting​ would remove the ANC protest and the protest of the nearby neighbors would automatically fall with it, but the protest of the adjoining businesses would remain.

The circumstances that brought about the change in the ANC’s position involve a Settlement Agreement negotiated with the Ugly Mug negotiated on behalf of ANC6B by Commissioner James Loots, in whose single member district the Ugly Mug resides.  At Thursday night’s meeting, ANC Commissioners hailed the agreement as much improved and worthy of support.

Loots is an attorney whose clients have included restaurants on Barracks Row.  He has also been counsel in a case in which he represented a group including The Ugly Mug in an unrelated legal matter.  This fact lead Commissioner Diane Hoskins to raise the issue of a possible conflict of interest, though she did not use the term.  She referred to a “special relationship” that Loots had with the Ugly Mug’s owner, which, she said raised concerns.

​Loots attempted to assuage those concerns by emphasizing his limited contact with the Ugly Mug’s owner.  But later in the meeting, Loots’ asserted that an email he had received earlier in the afternoon from one of the adjoining business owners stated that if the ANC approved the Settlement Agreement, the adjoining owner would withdraw his protest which allowed those present to infer that the owner was satisfied with the agreement.  That interpretation was challenged by one of the nearby residents, who, reading the email, noted that the caveat was that the nearby owner felt that pursuing the protest without the support of the ANC would be pointless.​  ​

Among the new concessions that Ugly Mug’s owner has agreed to in the current Settlement Agreement was limit​ing new seats to​ 95, extend​ing​ noise and privacy protection to nearby residents even though he is not required to do so, and clos​ing​ the atrium at 10:30pm Sunday through Thursday and at midnight Friday and Saturday.  The owner also agreed to make extra efforts on trash, sanitation, and rodent control.

Commissioner Chander Jayaraman moved to strengthen the agreement in three respects:​ extending the definition of entertainment to include karaoke, requiring more frequent trash pickups, and requiring the atrium to be closed at 11:30pm on Friday and Saturday.

When ​Jayaraman rais​ed​ this last point​, several commissioners were seen to shake their heads in disapproval, seeming to indicating that the request was unreasonable.  ​After a long pause, Jawblonski said, “Why not?  Let’s just get this over with” and the weekend time limit was incorporated into the agreement.​  This exchange would seem to indicate that one of the keys to winning concessions for the neighborhood was locating commissioners willing to negotiate them.​

In the end, the Committee voted 8-0-1 (Loots abstaining) to forward the Settlement Agreement to the full ANC without recommendation, and urged residents and the Ugly Mug owner to attempt to resolve any remaining differences at before next Tuesday.

​It is worth noting that this is an ANC with seven new commissioners.  It usually takes at least a term before a commissioner starts feeling that sense of entitlement that leads him or her ​to think that he or she knows what’s best for the community and feels free to represent constituents without consulting them or asking for their participation in the process.  ​

Attorney Charges Foul Play on Hine Project Housing Tax Credits

Asks HUD Inspector General for Investigation

by Larry Janezich

Attorney Oliver Hall has formally requested HUD’s Inspector General investigate the Hine development “to determine whether it complies with requirements for inclusion in the Low income Housing Tax Credit program [LIHTC].”  In December of 2013, DC Housing Finance Agency (DCHFC) voted to grant a 4% tax credit to Stanton-EastBanc under the federal program to compensate developers for the cost of affordable income housing. The tax credit, when traded to Wall Street investors, generates capital that pays for all of the hard and most of the soft expenses involved in constructed affordable units.  Unlike a tax deduction, the tax credit is a dollar for dollar (or more) return to the developer for every dollar invested.  In the case of Hine, this could amount to a federal grant of $6 to $7 million dollars, and is intended to pay for the entire cost of the North Building.

According to Hall, who says he obtained the Stanton-Eastbanc LITHC application under the Freedom of Information Act:  “Based on a review of Stanton-EastBanc’s LIHTC application, however, it appears that the project fails to meet the threshold requirement for low income occupancy, under either the “20-50 Rule” or the “40-60 Rule”  [20% of the units available at 50% of Area Median Income, or 40% of the units at available at 60% Area Median Income].  The result, Hall claims, is that Hine Developer Stanton-Eastbanc is receiving a full subsidy but not providing the required number of units in return.

Let’s see how this plays out.

The Hine project will include a total of 158 residential units, 46 of which are designated “affordable.”  The project is planned to be two separate structures:  the North building with 34 residential units, and the South Building with 124 units.  The developers have designated 29 units in the North Building as “affordable” at 60% Area Median Income (AMI) and thus meeting the “40% at 60%” LIHTC eligibility rule.

The North Building also has five “affordable units” at 30% Area Median Income.

According to Hall, the Hine project, considered as one development—as it was presented to the city, to the community and is subject to the PUD order—does not meet the threshold for eligibility for a federal grant. (See the full text of Hall’s letter in the Library on CHC’s homepage)

According to Hall, DCHFA declared Hine eligible only because it excluded the South Building in its entirety from its calculations. Standing alone, the North Building complies with the 40-60 Rule. “But,” Hall’s letter states “the North Building and South Building are both parts of the same project, to be constructed simultaneously by the same developer on the same lot, and they are subject to the same Zoning Commission order approving them as a single PUD” – a fact acknowledged by Stanton-EastBanc in its LITHC application.

This action, Hall says, “rewards Stanton-EastBanc for what appears to be a deliberate attempt to evade those requirements by segregating the affordable units of its project in a separate building. Further, it invites any other developer to claim that an ineligible project is eligible for housing tax credits simply by dividing it into parts, and designating a single part as a distinct project that meets either the 40-60 Rule or the 20-50 Rule.”  If considered as one project—and, in light of the fact that the developer is paying $0 for the North Parcel because he is allowed to deduct its cost from the amount paid for the South Parcel, it probably should be—the DC government has given valuable land away to a developer without receiving its fair share of affordable housing in return.

Hall says that the awarding of LITHC tax credits to Stanton- EastBanc raises questions about the process by which DCHFA approved this project, suggesting that DCHFA is not exercising adequate oversight over the LIHTC program.

In addition, the letter notes, LITHC Board of Directors Vice Chair, Leila Batties, voted in favor of granting the tax credits, despite an apparent conflict of interest “that should have disqualified her from voting to approve Stanton-EastBanc’s LIHTC application.”  Batties is an attorney with Holland and Knight, who represents EastBanc in its capacity as developer of the West End Library development.  As a partner in Stanton-EastBanc, EastBanc submitted LIHTC applications for both the Hine and West End projects.

CHC contacted EastBanc’s Anthony Lanier for comment, who refuted Hall’s claim that the LIHTC meeting was not properly noticed and stood by the legitimacy of the separating of the project in two parts in order to render it eligible for LIHTC funding.  The full text of Lanier’s response can be seen in the Library on CHC’s home page.

A spokesperson for the DC Housing Finance Agency , when asked to react to Hall’s letter, said, “We believe that the Agency’s decision to approve the Eligibility Resolution for the Hine’s project (North LIHTC) is grounded in sound legal analysis and that the project’s qualifications fits squarely within the requirements of the tax code.  Ms. Leila Batties’ vote on the project was appropriate and permissible within the parameters and requirements set forth in the Agency’s statue and the Board’s Conflict of Interest Resolution.”

Next:  The tangled web of LIHTC financing and DCHFA’s Conflict of Interest Policy

Marion Park, on E Street, SE, between 4th and 5th Streets, SE. In the background is the First District MPD Headquarters

ANC On Track to Withdraw Support for Swamp Fox Memorial in Marion Park

by Larry Janezich

Tuesday night, about a dozen neighbors of Marion Park appeared before ANC6B’s Planning and Zoning Committee to continue their protest against locating a proposed memorial to Revolutionary War General Francis Marion in Marion Park.

​B​y the end of the meeting, the ANC appeared ready to withdraw its support for placing the memorial in the park – known as “Turtle Park” by the neighbors.

Last September, when approached by the National Park Service (NPS) to voice a preference for siting of the memorial, ​the ANC voted 4 – 3 with 2 abstentions in favor of locating ​it ​​in Marion Park, though commissioners complained at the time about the N​PS​’s presumptuous process and lack of consultation.  That vote was conveyed to the National Park Service in a letter detailing a list of attached conditions related to consultation with the neighbors of the park.  ​Neighbors at that meeting complained that they had been blindsided, with virtually no notice that the park was being considered as the location of a memorial which they said was not only inappropriate for the park, but which would interfere with the public’s recreational use of it. See previous CHC post here: http://bit.ly/1wzFEQs

As of now, according to NPS’s Glenn DeMarr, who attended Tuesday night’s meeting, the project is on hold – the seven year Congressional authorization is set to expire on May 8, thus not allowing enough time to complete site approval or funding.  The South Carolina sponsor of the memorial has so far garnered only $50,000 of the $1 – ​​$2 million in contributions which must be raised during the authorization period.  According the DeMarr, the South Carolina Congressional delegation has introduced a bill to extend the authorization for an additional three years.  Nothing can happen until the authorization is extended, but sources indicated that passage of the bill is likely.

Neighbors opposed to the project said that last​ September​’s​ ANC vote was being represented as community approval of siting the project in Marion Park, and that the conditions attached to that support were being dis​regarded​.  They said that the first thing that city representatives want to know when opponents seek their aid in opposing the memorial’s siting is “Where does the ANC stand on this​?​” and that as long as the letter is out there it will be cited as ANC support for locating the memorial in Marion Park.

The committee might have recommended rescinding the letter Tuesday night, but former ANC6B Chair and current Vice Chair Brian Flahaven said he was opposed to withdrawing a written recommendation of a previous ANC.  Flahaven said he agreed that the NPS had misconstrued the ANC vote as community support for locating the memorial in Marion Park and hoped that next week the full ANC would find a way to withdraw its support for the memorial without rescinding the letter.

Only seven members of the ten member ANC were present Tuesday night, plus one resident commissioner.  When the vote came on language offered by Commissioner Hoskins rescinding the letter, it failed on a 4 – 4 vote, with Commissioner’s Samolyk, Hoskins, Krepp, and resident commissioner Chris Alexander voting for rescinding.  Commissioners Flahaven, Hagadorn, Burger and Oldenburg opposed.  Commissioners Loots, Chao, and Jayaraman were absent.

A vote on language offered by Hoskins to simply oppose any further action on the Marion Memorial also failed on an identical 4-4 vote.

Given the strength of the opposition among neighbors it seems virtually certain that the ANC will vote to oppose any further action on siting the Marion Memorial in Marion Park.  Whether that will have an impact on the final outcome, or whether the NPS will prevail in its seeming preference for siting the Swamp Fox memorial in Marion Park, thus continuing its long record of riding roughshod over the wishes of DC residents remains to be seen.

DeMarrs had no comment after the meeting other than to reiterate the project is on hold and nothing will happen until Congress reauthorizes it.

The 300 block of 7th Street, SE, soon to by the new home of the Hine Weekend Flea Markets

The Week Ahead… Now Rose’s Luxury Wants Sliding Glass Roof – Also Swamp Fox Back on Agenda

by Larry Janezich

Monday, February 2

CHRS Historic Preservation Committee meets at 6:30pm in Kirby House, 420 10th Street, SE.

Tuesday, February 3

ANC 6B Planning and Zoning Committee meets at 7:00 pm at St. Coletta of Greater Washington.

Among items on the agenda are the following:

639 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, (formerly Remington’s and soon to be 7-11) storefront alterations (ANC6B wants another look at proposed facade alterations)

1401 South Carolina Avenue SE, variance from lot occupancy requirements to allow conversion of church into flat, BZA hearing – March 3, 2015

1023 East Capitol Street SE, (P&C Market) appeal from October 29, 2014, decision by Zoning Administrator, Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, to issue Certificate of Occupancy to allow first-floor retail establishment in R-4 District, BZA hearing – March 17, 2015

Rose’s Luxury, 717 8th Street SE, informational presentation regarding proposed retractable roof for existing roof patio

National Park Service Francis Marion Memorial Project National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment.  Peter May of the National Park Service has been invited to provide an update on the siting of the Swamp Fox Memorial.

Tuesday, February 3

North Lincoln Park Neighborhood Assn. (NLPNA), 7:30 – 8:30 pm. at Maury Elementary School, 13th Street and Constitution Avenue, NE (Note new location)

Wednesday, February 4

Transportation Committee meets at 7:00 pm in Hill Center.

Among items on the agenda are the following:

Petition on widening Water Street, SE, from 18 feet to 24 feet between 11th & M Streets, SE

Virginia Avenue Tunnel Project Draft Construction Protection Plan

Fiscal Year 2015 sidewalk repairs list

Thursday, February 5

ANC6B Alcohol Beverage Committee meets at 7:00pm in Hill Center

Among items on the agenda are the following:

Banana Café & Piano Bar, 500 8th Street SE, modification of Settlement Agreement to permit extended hours on special occasions & New Year’s Eve

The Ugly Mug Dining Saloon, 723 8th Street SE, substantial change request for expansion of second floor & addition of 144 seats, changing total capacity to 242, ABC Board protest hearing – Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Thursday, February 5

Police Service Area (PSA) 107 meeting 7 p.m. SE Library, 403 7th St. SE

Sunset, Eastern Market Metro, January 18, 2015

The Week Ahead….and ANC’s Flahaven Wants Delay in Boys and Girls Club Decision

by Larry Janezich

ANC6B Commissioner Flahaven Wants Delay in DGS Award on Development of Eastern Branch Building

Last Tuesday, DSG held a community meeting to receive feedback on the two proposals for developing the Eastern Branch Boys and Girls Club Building.  The inability of the DGS to answer a number of questions which could affect the ANC’s recommendation led Flahaven to post the following conclusion in his summary of the meeting posted on his ANC6B blog:

“Given these uncertainties, I stated my discomfort with having ANC 6B and neighbors weigh in on the proposals without further clarification from DGS. I certainly would not want the commission to support a proposal that was later disqualified due to the affordable housing requirement, zoning issues, etc. DGS responded that they may go back to both development teams seeking Best and Final Offers with all of the outstanding issues clarified. My inclination is to ask DGS to delay their award decision until March while the development teams seek clarity and the neighborhood can better consider what is and what is not possible on the site.”

Although some fifty residents attended the meeting, as of Sunday night, only one has responded to Flahven’s request for community feedback on the proposal.

The full text of Flahaven’s summary can be seen here:  http://flahaven6b.com/

The Week Ahead….

Monday, January 26

ANC 6A Community Outreach Committee meets at 7:00pm at Maury Elementary School, Multi-purpose Room, 1250 Constitution Avenue, NE (Enter from 13th Street).

Tuesday, January 27

ANC6B Executive Committee meets at 7:00pm in Hill Center to set the agenda for the full ANC6B meeting on February 10.

Tuesday, January 27

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

On the Agenda:

Election of the Community Representative

Developer’s 3-D Model of Hine Project

Court of Appeals Rejects Hine Coalition Petition for Rehearing Hine Case

Decision Allows Project to Move Forward

by Larry Janezich

Yesterday, the DC Court of Appeals issued an order denying the petition for a rehearing of a request to send the Hine case back to the Zoning Commission (ZC).

The Zoning Commission (ZC) signed off on the project on November 21, 2012, but the project has been delayed since then by attempts of a group of Capitol Hill residents – The Hine Coalition – to require the ZC to rehear the case.  A three member DC Court of Appeals decision affirmed the ZC’s approval in August of 2014, and the Hine Coalition petitioned the full nine member court to hear the case.  Yesterday’s decision denied that petition.

Throughout the process, Capitol Hill residents comprising the Hine Coalition maintained that they did not oppose redevelopment of Hine School – what they objected to was the mass and height of the final Stanton-Eastbanc plan as inappropriate for the community.  The building’s seven stories will rise 94 feet – more than twice the height of the Le Pain Quotidian building across the street and will overwhelm the nearby iconic Eastern Market and the townhouses in the surrounding neighborhood.

The total 464,276 square foot project will provide 254,187 square feet for residential, 163,392 for offices, 46,699 for retail.   There will be 158 residential units – 46 of them affordable (most of these segregated in a separate building) and 260 parking spaces.  Many of the attractive features of the initial  proposal (62,000 square feet smaller) which helped win community support for the project fell away over time.

According to Hill Now http://www.hillnow.com/ the Stanton Eastbanc development team will start remediation of the building in about a month.  Razing the building will take two or three months after remediation is complete.  The developers expect the project to be complete by late 2017 or early 2018.

CHC posted two editorials detailing the evolution of the plans for the project here:  http://bit.ly/1rdjDVQ  and here:  http://bit.ly/1wbACpG

Department of General Services’ Michelle Chin, at last night’s community meeting on development of the Hill East Boys and Girls Club Building

Flawed DGS Request for Proposals for Boys and Girls Club Presents Stark Choices

25 Year Lease Requirement Skews Selection Process in Favor of Public Financing

by Larry Janezich

At Tuesday night’s community meeting hosted by DC’s Department of General Services (DGS) to hear proposals for development of the Boys and Girls Club Eastern Branch building, community residents were presented with only two choices: affordable units to be constructed with public financing through the Low Income Tax Credit program, and market rate units financed through private equity.  Both plans would dedicate the residential housing to seniors, as called for in the RFP.  At that point the plans diverge dramatically.

The first plan, presented by the Menkiti Group and Dantes Partners, proposes 49 small units in the 600 – 800 square foot range, 10 on-site parking spaces, and a 5,000 square foot space the DGS wants to be set aside for community purposes, but for which the developer has not specified a use.  The plan envisions a modern vertical “pop-up” that sits on top of the extant structure. Dantes Partners president Buwa Binitie says that the building will be 100% affordable housing which suggests that he will finance entirely through the government’s Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, and this in turn suggests that he was not able to raise any private equity outside of the LIHTC program for his plans.

In contrast, Century Associates proposes 27 market-rate units of various sizes, 16-18 on-site parking spaces, and a remaining community space of 4,200 square feet in which the team plans to put an indoor children’s play space.  The proposal stays within the existing building envelope, a point that lead developer Joel Kelty stressed throughout this presentation.  Since the building is not new construction, there is no requirement that a 10 percent of the units be affordable under inclusionary zoning requirements.  Kelty said last night that if the city provided a longer lease than the current 25 years, he would be happy to work an affordable housing component into his plans.  Otherwise, Kelty said, getting private equity for such a short term lease is difficult.

If this is the case, it raises questions why DGS​ attached the short 25 year lease condition to the Request for Proposals (RFP).  In addition, it was also left unclear whether the Eastern Branch disposition must comply with the new law that all lands disposed by the city for residential development must be at least 30% affordable, since the RFP was issued before the law took effect.  DGS officials offered no definitive resolution of this point last night.

The only point of agreement between the two finalists seemed to be that the unusual construction of the building posed considerable challenges.  According to Kelty, the RFP had elicited scant interest from DC’s developers – contrary to the statement of DSG’s Michelle Chin at the beginning of the meeting who told the dozens of community residents that its RFP had met with “considerable interest.”

It seemed to some observers that the residents who attended last night’s meeting, numbering about 50, favored the Century Associates plan, despite the lack of clarity and a lack of order in the meeting’s proceedings which frustrated attendees.  ANC Commissioner Brian Flahaven underscored his hope that the development for this project would move along in the process, but the starkly different nature of the proposals and the inability of DGS officials to resolve confusion last night led him to subsequently suggest that the ANC might wait until Best and Final Offers were submitted to the DGS before weighing in on the site.  It is likely that the ANC will consider the development at its Planning and Zoning Committee meeting on February 3 and the full ANC meeting February 10, unless DSG asks for Best and Final Offers.  According to a time line announced September 23, 2014, DSG is scheduled to make a final selection in February.  DSG expects the project to take three years to completion.  See CHC posting here:  http://bit.ly/XYrQzf

Sergeant Curry, MPD District One, Wears One of the 160 Body Cameras Being Tested in the City

Why Cops Can’t Take Your Word on Some Criminal Activity – and Body Cameras in ANC6B

by Larry Janezich

Six of us showed up for the PSA (Police Service Area) 108 meeting at Liberty Baptist Church last Thursday night: ANC6B Commissioner Brian Flahaven, four residents and a journalist.  MPD First District’s Lt. Dykes is the designated PSA Lieutenant for PSA 108, but since he works a later shift, the meeting was conducted by Sergeants Curry and Thompson.  Curry remarked on the attendance, noting that only one person had shown up for the last meeting.

In the course of the discussion on what is happening in PSA 108, Curry mentioned that in contrast to cases where an officer is given evidence that a felony has been committed, arrests and citations for some misdemeanors – including disorderly conduct – must be witnessed by an officer before the officer can take action.  According to Curry, not even photographic evidence provided to an officer is sufficient.  Curry said that the DC Code lists 27 misdemeanors, some of which require that a police officer witness the act before taking action, and some not.  Pressed as to which needed to be witnessed and which do not, Curry referred the questioner to the DC Code.

Also of note, residents may not be aware that body cameras are being used in ANC6B, and Sergeant Curry was wearing one.  On October 1, some 160 MPD volunteers (master control officers and sergeants) from all seven police districts began a six month pilot program using five models from seven vendors.  Cameras being used include those that mount to an officer’s collar, shirt front, or eyeglass frame.  They can be turned on at the officers’ discretion but under departmental policy, cameras are required to be turned on when an officer receives a call for service or assistance and must remain on until the call is finished.

In the interest of promoting a closer working relationship with the MPD, Flahaven said that ANC6B commissioners have talked about asking MPD officials to interact with the ANC on a regular basis on policing in ANC6B, and speculated that could happen this year.  The city has seven police districts, each divided into Police Service Areas.  Capitol Hill’s First District has 8 PSAs.  See here:  http://1.usa.gov/1J3W2Kp

A useful website that is underpublicized at the PSA 108 and PSA 107 meetings this reporter has attended is the DC Police Crime Mapping website:  http://crimemap.dc.gov/

For example, in a few key strokes you can find details on the type and location of each of the 34 crimes reported within 1000 feet of Eastern Market Metro (or any other address) in the last 30 days.  Go here:  http://crimemap.dc.gov/Report.aspx

26 Condos and 2 Floors of Retail Planned for 645-654 H Street, NE

ANC6C Recommends Zoning Adjustments for 26 Unit + Retail at 646-654 H Street, NE

Last Wednesday, ANC6C voted 5-0 to recommend the Board of Zoning Adjustment approve zoning changes for Rock Creek Property Group and Cornerstone Development Group’s 32,600 square foot mixed use project on H Street, NE.

When complete, the six level, 75 foot high development will provide 26 high end condos and penthouse luxury units and 8,800 square feet of retail on the first and second floors. Only five compact car parking spaces will be provided.

The developer says if all goes according to plan, they could break ground on the building in late 2015 or early 2016.  Construction could take some 14 months.  The building is being designed by PGNArchitects.

Boys and Girls Club, Eastern Branch Building, 261 17th Street, SE

The Week Ahead….Public to Weigh Plans for Boys and Girls Club

by Larry Janezich

Monday, January 19

Federal Holiday:  Birthday of the Rev. Martin Luther King

(ANC6A Community Outreach Committee meeting postponed until Monday, January 26)

(ANC6A Transportation Committee meeting postponed until February 9)

Tuesday, January 20

Boys and Girls Club development proposals will be presented to the community for comment at a meeting hosted by Department of General Services.  The meeting will be 6:30pm – 8:30pm at Payne Elementary School, 1445 C Street, SE.  The city plans to select a developer to develop the Boys and Girls Club Building at 216 17^th Street, SE, into residential units and community space. 

ANC 6B will consider the community responses and submit its comments at the February 10 monthly meeting.  The Payne meeting is the first of only two opportunities residents will have to affect how this property will be developed.  The only other chance will be at the February ANC6B meeting but time will be very limited.  See CHC post here:  http://bit.ly/XYrQzf

Tuesday, January 20

ANC6A Alcoholic Beverage Licensing Committee meets at Sherwood Recreation Center (640 10th Street, NE)

Among items on the agenda:

Report on Pizza Parts & Service and Copycat Co. Settlement Agreements.

Tuesday, January 20

CHRS Board of Directors meets at 6:30pm in Capitol Hill Townhomes, 750 6th Street, SE, second floor.

Wednesday, January 21

ANC6A Economic Development and Zoning Committee meets at 7:00pm in Sherwood Recreation Center (640 10th Streets, NE)

Among items on the agenda:

1600 Block of Kramer Street, NE: DC Department of Housing and Community Development has solicited offers for the development of multiple adjoining vacant lots located on this block, including with mixed-income housing. Three organizations submitting offers to develop the property will be providing separate informational presentations regarding their proposals. They are:

– Mi Casa, Inc.

– Manna, Inc.

– Neighborhood Development Co.

(Kramer Street is one block long and runs east to west between Miner Elementary School and Rosdale Regreational Center.)

1371 to 1375 H Street: Applicant seeks a variance from the offstreet parking requirements and a special exception from the roof structure setback requirements to construct a six-story multifamily residential building with ground floor retail.

721 11th Street, NE: Applicant seeks a special exception for not meeting the lot occupancy requirements, the rear yard setback requirements, and the nonconforming structure requirements, to convert an existing two-story garage into a second-story apartment and construct a covered walkway in the R-4 District.  (The city is considering proposals to change the current regulation which considers two structures on a lot joined by a covered walkway or trellis to be a single structure which would allow this second story addition to the garage.  ANC6A and 6B have had several of these cases recently, apparently part of a rush to take advantage of a loophole before it closes.)