Category Archives: Uncategorized

Capitol Hill Restoration Society  Rips Hine’s Signature Building Design – “We …Ask That This Building Not Be Given Conceptual Approval”

by Larry Janezich

The Capitol Hill Restoration Society (CHRS) today filed its recommendations regarding the conceptual design for Stanton/Eastbanc’s latest drawings on the Hine development, and took particular exception to the design of the project’s signature 7^th and Pennsylvania Avenue building, calling it “the most problematic and controversial aspect of the buildings being considered at this time….  The report states, “[w]e do not find it compatible with the Capitol Hill Historic District and ask that this building not be given conceptual approval.

The report took issue with the building’s 90 foot height, noting it would be a third taller than neighboring buildings.  At last month’s Historic Preservation Review Board Hearing, the staff suggested than a decrease in height could be accomplished by a top floor setback.  That idea was employed by projet architect Amy Weinstein, but the committee deemed that approach insufficient for historic district compatibility, recommending instead dropping the seventh floor and setting back the sixth. 

The CHRS also took issue with the architectural expression which “seems to build on (an)…industrial sensitivity as if it should be the main office in a warehouse or manufacturing facility.”  The report singled out the rotating brick columns, saying they seemed to “compress and expand and appear to lean in different directions, totally confusing many viewers and negating the sense of firmness and apparent strength one expects…”

The report was slightly less critical of the project’s second building fronting Pennsylvania Avenue, that one at 8^th and D Streets, noting that while the architect has improved the design, “it still retains a completely different identity than the rest of the 8^th Street (residential) building in both materials and style.”

One of the CHRS’s concerns is that the “materials, color and design do not seem to relate to the Capitol Hill Historic District.”  The Society again states flatly, “we do not think it is yet compatible with the Capitol Hill Historic District.”   The report criticizes the 55 foot high building for its blockiness which lacks the traditional base-middle-top pattern evident in the Haines Building across the street. 

With respect to the color and design of the patterns of brick panels the architect uses to provide texture to the façade, CHRS felt that” too many patterns in irregular placements” could be visually confusing, and urged continued study of this aspect. 

CHRS had fewer issues with the residential portion of the building facing 8th Street and running from D to C Streets, generally approving the redesigned facade.

The Historic Preservation Review Board will meet next Thursday, June 30, to continue consideration of Stanton/Eastbanc’s historic preservation application for the project, focusing on the 7th and Pennsylvania Avenue office building and the 8th Street building.  The HPRB will put off reviewing the project’s 7^th Street office building, the C Street residential building until the July meeting.  

The entire text of the CHRS Historic Preservation Committee will be available shortly on its website at:  http://www.chrs.org/

The latest Stanton/Eastbanc drawings on the Hine project can be found here:   http://hineschool.com

(Unofficial) ANC6b Memorandum on Hine to the Historic Preservation Office Which Passed Tuesday Night

by Larry Janezich  

The following document is an unofficial version of ANC6b’s memorandum to the Historic Preservation Board making additional recommendations regarding the design of the Hine Development.  The Historic Preservation Review Board will meet Thursday, June 30, to consider the design and historical preservation aspects of the two buildings which face Eastern Market Metro.  The Board will consider the other buildings in the project at its July meeting.  The unofficial language of the memorandum recommending additional changes is as follows:

The text of the original resolution passed on April 28th referred to in the first and last paragraphs can be viewed here:  http://www.anc6b.org/library.html 

ANC6b previously offered its views on the entire project at the April 28^th conceptual review hearing.  That resolution remains our guiding position on this project and we request the Historic Preservation Review Board measure the project against that resolution.

We would however like to highlight several areas in the recent designs that call for further comment:

1.  8^th Street Residential building

The new design approach to the 8^th Street residential building, which responds in part to comments from the Board, neighborhood input and the ANC6b resolution, improves the overall quality of the building, modestly reduces the building’s sense of mass and lowers the 8^th and D Street corner of the building.  However, the 8^th Street entrance remains too high.  Additionally, inclusion of rounded geometric features and design details would improve the overall design, look, feel and rhythm of the building.

ANC6B recommends use of creative window surrounds, to include lintels, sills, sashes and hoods.  We also recommend either reducing the height of the entrance section of the building or setting back the entire entrance section.

 2.  8^th and D Street Building

The building at 8^th and D Street has been of particular concern for many observers of the project, and while there have been efforts to improve this building we feel it still relies too heavily on square geometries and pattern making.  As a result, it fits in awkwardly with the historic buildings that surround it, and remains a distinctly modernist, almost brutalist, architectural expression in an area devoid of such statements.  It is also important to note that this building is not truly a stand-alone building; rather it is the southern end of the 8^th Street residential building.

ANC6B recommends further refinement in the design of this building facing D Street within the context of the overall building, and treating it as an integral component of the 8^th Street structure.

 3.  7^th and Pennsylvania Avenue Office Building

The changes to the 7^th and Pennsylvania Avenue building have shown responsiveness to the height and scale issues raised in our original resolution.  However, setting back the 7^th floor of the building, while reducing the overall mass of the structure, exposes the mechanical rooms that form the 8^th floor of the building.

ANC6B recommends continued evaluation of this building and per our previous resolution, we urge the developers to creatively reduce the size or visual impact of the mechanical penthouses.

 4.  7^th Street Office Building

With regard to the building on 7^th Street, we feel that while there have been some design improvements; there is still a concern with regard to the street level feel.  This is one of the most dynamic and vibrant retail blocks on the Hill.  It is integral to the historic charm of the neighborhood, and, as a “place making” corridor contributes significantly to the fabric of the hill.  This consideration should be central to the design philosophy of the development.  With this in mind, the current design still feels relatively bland and canyon like.

ANC6B recommends a pedestrian leve3l façade that activates the street and engenders the same level of liveliness as that of the storefronts and restaurants across from it.

 5.  Interior Courtyard

ANC6B previously raised a concern and suggested alternatives with regard to the interior courtyard.  Given this review comprises the majority of the structures around the courtyard we are concerned that these recommendations have not been addressed.  

6.  For the buildings facing Pennsylvania Avenue, ANC6B recommends the buildings clearly articulate a top, middle, and base. 

 Our position remains that ANC support for this project is contingent on addressing recommendations in the original resolution.

ANC6B Chair Neil Glick Counts Hands During Vote Tuesday Night

ANC 6B Passes Diluted Memorandum on Hine:  Majority Votes to Recommend that Developers Refine 8^th and D Building Plan

 by Larry Janezich

 In a two and half hour Special Call meeting devoted to consideration of Stanton/Eastbanc’s recent proposed alterations to the Hine Development, ANC 6B declared its previous resolution to be its “guiding position” on the project, and that alterations, while welcome, had not gone far enough to address its original concerns.

 Voting in favor of the memorandum were Commissioners Campbell, Flahaven, Frishberg, Glick, Green, and Pate.  Voting in opposition were Commissioners Garrison, Metzger and Oldenberg, all of whom cited their previous opposition to the ANC’s resolution of recommended changes for Hine, passed on April 28^th, as the reason for their vote tonight. 

 The public comment period of the meeting featured an array of concerns and sentiments from the residents who attended the meeting.  Once the comment period closed, the ANC deliberated on a series of amendments.  Toward the close of the meeting, Brian Flahavan suggested that the language on the 8^th  and D Street building be altered from recommending “reconsidering the design” to recommending “further refinement” in the design.  Flahavan’s motion carried   5-3-1, with Commissioners Flahavan, Garrison, Green, Pate, and Metzger voting in favor; Commissioners Campbell, Frishberg, and Glick casting votes in opposition; and Oldenberg abstaining.  Garrison and Metzger offered no explanation that as to why they would vote for an amendment to alter the memorandum and then vote against the memorandum itself. 

The Commission also voted to embrace remarks made by Gary Peterson, Capitol Hill Restoration Board Zoning Chair, who offered his views in his capacity as a citizen, not as CHRS officer.  Peterson echoed a design suggestion made by the HPRB over a month ago—specifically, that the architect consider adorning the larger buildings facing Pennsylvania Avenue with features that demarcate a top, a middle and street-level perspective in order to make the scale of the buildings more approachable and in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.  The Commission incorporated this suggestion as a friendly amendment.    

The ANC will submit this memorandum to the Historic Preservation Review Board, set to take up the Hine project on the 30^th of June.

Neighbors Organize Formal Protest to Hill Center’s Application for a Liquor License – Claim ANC6B’s Deal Falls Short

by Larry Janezich

A dozen neighbors of the Hill Center who will be most adversely affected by events held at the Hill Center  – weddings, receptions, etc., – met Saturday afternoon to begin organizing a formal protest before the Alcohol Beverage Review Administration when it meets July 18 to consider granting the Center’s application for a liquor license.  The Hill Center’s annual operating budget is $750,000, much of which will be raised by renting out space for events.  The Hill Center has not released details of any business plan they have and refuses to estimate how many events they will hold annually to meet their financing goal.  The protest could delay what would otherwise be smooth sailing for approval of the license.  ANC6b unanimously approved the license application last Tuesday after entering into a voluntary agreement with the Center that neighbors consider inadequate. 

Some of the items the group will push for in a new voluntary agreement for the Center include reducing the hours they can serve alcohol, agree to no amplification of sound outside, limit further the occupancy for events, provide increased security inside and outside the grounds, restrict loading and unloading to Pennsylvania Avenue, and reduce the number of vehicles that automatically triggers the valet service.  Petitions are being circulated in support of the protest. 

One of the key organizers of the group is Barbara Eck, long active in the community.  In addition to being a longtime supporter of the Hill Center, Eck serves as Treasurer of Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee, a member of the Board of the Capitol Hill Restoration Society, a member of Coalition of Concerned Citizens of Eastern Washington, and supporter of the Ruth Ann Overbeck Capitol Hill History Project.

ANC6B Votes Liquor License for the Hill Center

Chipotle Special Exception Request Postponed until July

by Larry Janezich

The Hill Center

ANC 6B voted 8-0 to grant a liquor license to the Hill Center Tuesday night.  A new compromise limiting sale of alcohol in the summer garden was announced.  The new language would limit the sale of alcohol in the summer garden from 7:00am – 9:00pm Sunday through Thursday, and 7:00am – 10:00pm on Friday and Saturday.  Further, it would limit entertainment in the garden from 7:00am – 8:00pm Sunday through Thursday, and 7:00am – 9:00pm on Friday and Saturday.

Before the final vote came, the Commission agreed to amendments to the voluntary operating agreement by Commissioner Oldenburg reducing inside hours for entertainment and sale of alcohol to 1:00am on Sunday – Thursday, and 2:00am on Friday and Saturday.  Earlier, Hill Center representatives said they did not anticipate holding events until 3:00am (allowable under standard regulations), and that most events would end at midnight. Another Oldenburg amendment struck language in the voluntary agreement directing noise from outdoor events lasting past 10:00pm to be directed to the north. 

In addition, the Hill Center agreed to reduce the number of outside summer garden patrons to 300 for night time events and to limit amplification of sound outdoors to no later than 8:00pm Sunday – Thursday and 9:00pm Friday and Saturday. 

Despite assurances from Hill Center representatives – former city councilmember Sharon Ambrose and Nicky Cymrot, President of the Old Naval Hospital Foundation – that the Hill Center would not do anything to negatively impact thee community and that events would be overseen by Hill Center staff, twelve community members rose to voice requests for cutting back the hours, limiting noise, demand identification of locations where valet parking would occur, and request the Hill Center to provide off premise pedestrian control.    

The Commissioner Carol Green, stating that there is no one who doesn’t want the Hill Center to succeed, and expressing confidence that the Center will listen to neighbors and adjust operations to address concerns, moved approval of the liquor license request.  Norm Metzger seconded the motion. 

Commissioner Ivan Frishberg tried to wring a last minute concession from Ambrose and Cymrot to agree to a formal review and to request reopening the voluntary agreement if the concerns of the neighbors justified it, but the Ambrose and Cymrot adamantly refused.

The motion was agreed to 8 – 0.

Those voting for the motion were Chair Glick and Commissioners Garrison, Frishberg, Oldenburg, Metzger, Green, Flahaven, and Pate.

Commissioners Campbell and Critchfield were absent. 

Those audience members supporting more restrictions on the Center greeted the vote’s announcement with a loud chorus of boos.   

 Chipotle

In other action, ANC6B postponed consideration and a final vote on Chipotle’s request for a special exception to permit them to open a restaurant and carryout on Barracks Row. 

Chipotle fielded a large contingent of supporters, including Architect Jason Weulker; Chipotle real estate manager, Matt French; Chipotle DC operations manager, Ted Ferguson; Streetsense landlord, Guy Silverman. Barracks Row Main Street Executive Director Martin Smith was also present to lend support.

Raising concerns about the impact of the proposed restaurant were some 7^th Street neighbors who raised concerns regarding noise and rodents.  Chipotle strove to allay those concerns, pledging to be a good neighbor and acceding to several requests in an effort to head off problems.  More difficult to address was the concern that approving Chipotle would open the “flood gate” to other fast food outlets. 

The crucial question pushed by Commissioner Dave Garrison, was why do they deserve a special exception which would go against zoning regulations prohibiting fast food restaurants in the commercial corridor?  Chipotle’s argument was that they should not be considered a fast food restaurant because they are a new breed of restaurant – “fast- casual” – which “serves a different customer.” 

Pressing the issue, Garrison, said the argument amounted to “we’re good guys” – and went on to say that wasn’t a sufficient argument to justify an exception. 

Time was not Chipotle’s friend tonight, as the clocked ticked toward the mandatory 10:00pm adjournment deadline for the meeting. 

Commissioner Brian Pate moved to approve the special exception, which failed for a lack of a second. 

Frishberg moved to postpone further consideration until the July12 meeting. Green seconded the motion and the motion was agreed to 7 – 1. 

Those voting for the motion to postpone were Chair Glick, Commissioners Garrison, Frishberg, Oldenberg, Metzger, Green, Flahaven. 

Commissioner Pate voted against the motion. 

Commissioners Campbell and Critchfield were absent.

Upcoming:

by Larry Janezich

Tuesday. June 14

1.  ANC 6b Meets 7:00pm, Church of Jesus Christ of LDS, 522 7th Street SE

The Commission will vote on a special exception for Chipotle

The Commission will also vote on a liquor license for The Hill Center

In negotiations on a voluntary operating agreement to alleviate residents’ concerns regarding late hours, number of outdoor event participants, and noise, Hill Center has agreed to limit its hours of alcohol sales and entertainment as follows:

Indoors, Sunday through Thursday:  8:00am – 2:00am

Indoors, Friday and Saturday:  8:00am – 3:00am

Outdoors, Sunday through Thursday:  10:00am – 11:00pm

Outdoors, Friday and Saturday:  10:00am – 12:00 midnight

Outside events which go beyond 10:00pm will be limited to 385 participants and will be arranged so that noise will be directed to the north, away from residential neighborhoods.   

 2.  Latest Drawing on the Hine Development Available on Stanton Website – www.hineschool.com

Wednesday, June 15

1.  Commissioner Brian Pate’s new Citizen Outreach and Constituent Services Taskforce Meets, 7:00pm, ANC6B Office, 703 D Street SE

The agenda is to find ways to improve communications with and services for ANC6B  constituents

Watch for Updates.

Reginald Conyers Plays Baroque Concertos at Eastern Market Metro on Friday Morning

Reginal Conyers, Classical Musician

Eastern Market Metro:  8:30am Friday

by Larry Janezich

Reginald Conyers, classical music trumpeter, performed this morning at Eastern Market Metro. Accompanying recorded music, he played a selection of three Baroque concertos by Vivaldi, Telemann, and Handel. 

Conyers, 46, a Washington native, has earned a living as a street musician (busker) for the past 18 years in Boston, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, and DC.  He trained at Duke Ellington School of Music.

Haines Building Seen from North Side, Showing Two AT&T Antennas

Close up of Left Tower Showing Two Antennas

Verizon To Remedy Cell Phone Dead Zones on Capitol Hill – Seeks Installation of 15 Antennas on Haines Building Roof

by Larry Janezich

Verizon Communications representatives appeared before both the ANC6B Planning and Zoning Committee and the CHRS Historical Preservation Committee this week in support of their Historical Preservation Application regarding installing 15 new communication antennas on the roof of the Haines Building at 8^th and Pennsylvania Avenue, SE.  The building is owned by Community Connections, and is already the home of 9 similar AT&T antennas, some visible from the Eastern Market Metro Plaza and Pennsylvania Avenue.

Tuesday night, before the ANC Committee, Verizon stated they need the additional coverage to remedy the dead zone problem on Capitol Hill.  Many Verizon cell phone users experience dead zones in the form of dropped calls or poor signal quality.  The company is requesting approval for the installation of the additional antennas in three groups of five each, one on the building’s north side, one on the south side, and one on the east side.  The ten foot tall antennas are set back 10 feet from the building’s façade, but all three installations would be visible from near-by streets.  Verizon’s goal is to start construction by late summer or early fall and be “on air” by the end of the year.

The installation appears to be a given.  At issue is whether to shield the new antennas or to leave them exposed, as are the current AT&T antennas.  The AT&T antennas currently in place look something like the framework of what might have formerly been billboards.

The ANC Committee received assurances from Verizon representatives that the amount of radiation involved is minimal, the company representative stating that the radiation is one-tenth of what is considered to be harmful, and that those exposed to it would “probably receive more radiation from their cell phones.”

Commissioner Ivan Frishberg, who conducted much of the questioning of Verizon officials, moved that the Committee approve the Historic Preservation Application without screening, with a request that Verizon come back before the full ANC6B Tuesday, June 14, and during the ensuing time, determine if it is possible to move the antennas away from the Pennsylvania Avenue side.  He noted that 2 absent Commissioners – Garrison and Campbell – are expected to be present at the full ANC6B next week, and that an amendment to require screening as a condition of approval could emerge during the full ANC6B’s consideration of the issue.

The motion was agreed to by a vote of 4 – 2, with 1 abstention.

Commissioners Frishberg, Pate, Flahaven, and Oldenburg voted for the motion.  Commissioners Metzger and Green voted against.  Commissioner Glick abstained.

Separately, on Monday night, the Restoration Society’s Historic Preservation Committee heard the same presentation from Verizon Communications.

Like the ANC Committee, the Historic Preservation Committee seemed somewhat ambivalent regarding whether screens or no screens would be more intrusive.  The shielding could be fabricated to look like the exterior of the building, but as with the ANC Committee, opinion appeared to be divided whether that would look better or worse.

The final recommendation of the Committee is unknown, since, as is the usual practice, Chair Nancy Metzger announced that the Committee would go into executive session – with only committee members present – to discuss the matter.

The next CHRS Board meeting is on Tuesday, June 21, and the full board could consider the question, or, as is often the case, the Committee may make its recommendation directly to the Historic Preservation Office.