Category Archives: Uncategorized

Wells:  “Opportunity to Change Hine Project Mass and Height Has Not Passed” – 8^th Street Neighbors List Top Priorities

by Larry Janezich

On Wednesday night, 25 nearby 8^th 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 8^th 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.

Stanton-Eastbanc Gets Mixed Reviews on Revised Hine Drawings – Will File With HPRB for April 28^th Review

by Larry Janezich

Nearly 100 Restoration Society members and other Capitol Hill residents turned out for the Restoration Society’s general membership meeting on the Hine project.  Councilmember Tommy Wells and former Councilmember Sharon Ambrose were in attendance as were most of the Restoration Society Board members.  ANC Commissioners Ivan Frishberg and Brian Pate were present as well.

Stanton-Eastbanc, the developers, presented new drawings, revised since the last presentation in early March, to address concerns expressed by members of the community and community organizations..

Audience reviews of the new drawings were mixed.

Architect Amy Weinstein gave a PowerPoint tour of the project, listing changes which had occurred since early March:

The number of units in 8^th Street Residential Building has gone down by 13 – making the new total 149 instead of 162.

The number of parking spaces is undergoing revision.  The minimum number is 227 and the maximum number has gone from 270 to “To Be Determined.”  Weinstein said additional parking on a second level below grade is being considered.  (As pointed out in a previous emmcablog posting regarding EMCAC voting to reaffirm the Stanton design, the previous maximum of 270 will leave little public parking on weekends after needs of the residents, offices, retail, and some 100 flea market vendors are met.)

Weinstein then moved clockwise around the project starting at 8^th and C Streets, listing changes as she went.  .  .

8^th Street Residential Building

To break up the long façade, gaps have been introduced to simulate the natural gaps occurring in the blocks to the north of the project.

More variety has been introduced in the façade.

Shakespeare housing has been moved from the north end of the building to south of the building’s lobby.

The roof top swimming pool has been moved to the north end of the building.

The building has been lowered near Pennsylvania Avenue, and the fourth floor structure replaced with rooftop pavilions for the penthouse units.

The 8^th Street entrance to the building has been moved north.

Pennsylvania Avenue Office Building

The entrance has been moved to a tall glassed lobby on Pennsylvania Avenue in what was before the entrance to the public courtyard between the two buildings facing the Avenue.  This means that the only access to the courtyard from the street will be from C Street.

The roof line has been altered and the roof top pavilion eliminated.

7^th Street Residential Building

There now appears to be no boutique hotel planned for this building.

The entrance has been moved from 7^th Street to C Street.

Retail is now planned for the first floor.

The gated entrance to the courtyard will be adjacent to the building’s entrance..

North Residential Building

The building has been narrowed.

The entrance to two ground floor apartments will now face 7^th Street.

The lobby and entrance to the building will be on C Street.

The 4^th floor will be setback 68 feet from 8^th Street.

A question period followed the presentation.  Then audience members were permitted to speak regarding their views on the project.  The major areas of concern expressed by the audience in various forms were as follows:

The aesthetics are inconsistent with the character of the historic district.  This seemed to be the one thing held in common by the greatest number of those present.  8^th Street resident Mark Shlien struck a chord with many when he challenged Weinstein to create a building that would be as much her legacy as Eastern Market was for revered market architect Adolph Cluss.  Nearby neighbor Maggie Hall asked for a show of hands which revealed that about one third felt that the drawing showed a vast improvement, about one third thought there had bees some improvement, and one third thought there had been no improvement.  Another neighbor expressed the discomfort of many with the architect’s frequently stated goal of using a “more contemporary way to express Victorian design elements” as being inappropriate in such a large project

The 8^th Street residential building is too big. This was voiced by many of those living across the street or nearby, east of the project.  The assertion that density was necessary to justify city expenditures for the Market Metro Station in the name of smart growth was challenged by 8^th Street resident Wendy Blair, asking in so many words, why is increased density in a neighborhood which has density enough, such good thing?

The North Residential Building is too high.  This heard from the neighbors in the 200 block of 8^th Street whose back yards and windows will be looked into from apartment windows.

Safety concerns regarding the entrance to parking. 8^th Street resident Marion Connolly warned of the potentially hazardous situations – especially on weekends – that the underground parking entrance near the heavily trafficked 8^th and C Streets intersection will create.

Several residents and neighbors gave their unqualified support to the project.

Afterward, the consensus seemed to be that the meeting had been a valuable opportunity to air community views.  CHRS will meet on Tuesday April 19 to approve a letter or comments to HPRB.  That report will be posted on the CHRS website www.chrs.org after submission to the HPRB.

The next – and final – public event related to the Hine project will be the ANC6b Special Call meeting on April 26.  The Commission will hear from the developers and the community and then vote on a resolution regarding recommendations to the HPRB for its April 28 review of the project.

Stanton will post the revised Hine School site plans on its website http://hineschool.com/design-concept/ on Thursday, April 7.

Stanton-Eastbanc to Unveil New Hine Drawings Tuesday Night

ANC To Have the Community’s Last Word on Hine Project

by Larry Janezich

Stanton-Eastbanc will reveal their final changes to the concept drawings for the Hine Project at the Capitol Hill Restoration Society’s (CHRS) Special Membership Meeting on the Hine site.  The meeting will include a Q&A with Stanton-Eastbanc on their proposed plans and a request for comments from CHRS members and the public.  The event will be free and open to the public and will be on Tuesday, April 5, from 6:45pm – 8:30pm, at Maury elementary school at 13^th and Constitution Avenue, NE (entrance on 13^th Street)

Stanton partner Kitty Kaupp has confirmed that new drawings will address some of the concerns raised by the ANC and the community in reaction to prior presentations in early March.

Thereafter, the process will unfold as follows:

April 13 – ANC6b will circulate a draft response to the latest design concept among ANC commissioners.

April 19 – The ANC6b draft response will be made public and widely disseminated for public feedback.

April 19 – CHRS Board meeting – vote on recommendations likely.

April 20 – CHRS files its recommendation with HPRB and it becomes public..

April 26 – ANC6b holds Special Call Meeting to hear a presentation from Stanton-Eastbanc, and to consider and vote on a resolution of recommendation regarding Stanton-Eastbanc’s design concept.

April  22 – The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) staff report in which the staff evaluates the Hine project’s neighborhood compatibility will be available on line.

April 28 – The Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) considers Stanton-Eastbanc’s design concept and reviews the site plan, overall architectural direction, height, and mass.  It will not review construction detailing at this stage. The developers will make a presentation, and HPRB will hear from the ANC, community organizations and individuals, and parties in favor and opposed.  HPRB will deliberate openly – and ask questions, then vote on a motion or series of motions based on the HPO staff recommendations in the report.

As a final note, the Office of Planning does not believe that the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts has any jurisdiction over the Hine project.