New Ward 3 Homeless Families Shelter Site

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her Council career has jumped the shark. Can anyone suggest a viable alternative who will represent Ward 3 residents and businesses in a reasonable way? I'd like to start supporting that person. Where's the opposition in Chehdom?

I can think of two. Matt Frumin who waged a losing campaign for the DC Council a few years ago. But he lost a lot of support outside Janney's district with his behavior on the school redistricting committee. Another is Nancy MacWood, longtime chair of ANC 3C, the ward's largest ANC. MacWood is smart, fair and widely respected, but she'd have to be convinced to run.

A huge no to MacWood. Huge. She hates everything, she screwed the neighborhood out of being able to use the NCS gym because she lives across the street from it, she caused the 15 year delay to Cathedral Commons (and the effect of adding the residential tower which was not part of the original proposal)

The NIMBYs love her, but she would be a nightmare.

There are a lot of good ANC Commissioners as well as the current and former school board reps. Plenty of bench talent.

In fact, it was Macwood who invited Giant to submit plans for redevelopment of the site in the 2004-2005 time frame, after Ahold had acquired Giant. Whether or not that turned out to be a good idea depends on whether one thinks Cathedral Commons is a good or shitty design.

No she led the charge on trying to get a historic landmark for that building as a way to delay the process...THEN Giant got bought two years later causing additional delays. She was never supportive.

Not true. As ANC chair, Macwood worked with local groups, Giant and the DC Office of Planning to broker an agreement in which Giant agreed to build a store with multiple entrances along Wisconsin Ave. The May 2002 agreement was significant enough for Mayor Williams to announce.

"Hearings before the Historic Preservation Review Board were postponed twice while McCarthy and Maloney nudged both sides to an agreement, The expanded, 30,000-square-foot market should be completed by summer 2003, with a deli, bakery and other amenities clustered near the Wisconsin Avenue entrances.

Giant also agreed to submit its architectural drawings to Maloney's office for review. In exchange, the citizens group dropped its landmark petition."

Giant never followed through on the agreement it signed to open a store by 2003, and it was Macwood that then persuaded new Giant management to engage with the ANC in 2006. (It's ironic that today's store, completed in 2014, has only one, dark tunnel like entrance and no windows on Wisconsin Ave.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/2002/05/07/giant-neighbors-reach-deal-on-renovations/162860a5-5593-46ce-9351-8baba983985c/?utm_term=.65b72d7aa287

I seem to remember this. It's not surprising that Giant reneged on its agreement with DC and the neighborhood bodies. A once storied local company, Giant today is poorly managed and much of what they sell is of poor quality yet not at low prices. I seldom shop there, but when I do I want to take a long shower afterward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her Council career has jumped the shark. Can anyone suggest a viable alternative who will represent Ward 3 residents and businesses in a reasonable way? I'd like to start supporting that person. Where's the opposition in Chehdom?

I can think of two. Matt Frumin who waged a losing campaign for the DC Council a few years ago. But he lost a lot of support outside Janney's district with his behavior on the school redistricting committee. Another is Nancy MacWood, longtime chair of ANC 3C, the ward's largest ANC. MacWood is smart, fair and widely respected, but she'd have to be convinced to run.

A huge no to MacWood. Huge. She hates everything, she screwed the neighborhood out of being able to use the NCS gym because she lives across the street from it, she caused the 15 year delay to Cathedral Commons (and the effect of adding the residential tower which was not part of the original proposal)

The NIMBYs love her, but she would be a nightmare.

There are a lot of good ANC Commissioners as well as the current and former school board reps. Plenty of bench talent.

In fact, it was Macwood who invited Giant to submit plans for redevelopment of the site in the 2004-2005 time frame, after Ahold had acquired Giant. Whether or not that turned out to be a good idea depends on whether one thinks Cathedral Commons is a good or shitty design.

No she led the charge on trying to get a historic landmark for that building as a way to delay the process...THEN Giant got bought two years later causing additional delays. She was never supportive.

Not true. As ANC chair, Macwood worked with local groups, Giant and the DC Office of Planning to broker an agreement in which Giant agreed to build a store with multiple entrances along Wisconsin Ave. The May 2002 agreement was significant enough for Mayor Williams to announce.

"Hearings before the Historic Preservation Review Board were postponed twice while McCarthy and Maloney nudged both sides to an agreement, The expanded, 30,000-square-foot market should be completed by summer 2003, with a deli, bakery and other amenities clustered near the Wisconsin Avenue entrances.

Giant also agreed to submit its architectural drawings to Maloney's office for review. In exchange, the citizens group dropped its landmark petition."

Giant never followed through on the agreement it signed to open a store by 2003, and it was Macwood that then persuaded new Giant management to engage with the ANC in 2006. (It's ironic that today's store, completed in 2014, has only one, dark tunnel like entrance and no windows on Wisconsin Ave.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/2002/05/07/giant-neighbors-reach-deal-on-renovations/162860a5-5593-46ce-9351-8baba983985c/?utm_term=.65b72d7aa287

I seem to remember this. It's not surprising that Giant reneged on its agreement with DC and the neighborhood bodies. A once storied local company, Giant today is poorly managed and much of what they sell is of poor quality yet not at low prices. I seldom shop there, but when I do I want to take a long shower afterward.

I made the mistake of buying some fish last year at the new Giant on Wisconsin, and even aa long shower coudln't remove the smell from my hands! Never will I buy fish there again.

[Anonymous]

What I don't understand is, why is the Ward 3 shelter designed to be about 50% larger than the other new shelters being built in the other wards? It's counter-intuitive, when Ward 3 has the smallest homeless population yet is getting the biggest shelter by capacity and size.

[Anonymous]

And the lawsuit over the site has been dismissed on the same day the city announced that the shelter now includes paving over part of the community garden and the tennis courts.
http://wamu.org/story/17/02/08/d-c-judge-dismisses-lawsuit-family-homeless-shelter-ward-3/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And the lawsuit over the site has been dismissed on the same day the city announced that the shelter now includes paving over part of the community garden and the tennis courts.
http://wamu.org/story/17/02/08/d-c-judge-dismisses-lawsuit-family-homeless-shelter-ward-3/

Link to this info please about the paving of the tennis courts and part of the community garden?

[Anonymous]

Message from ANC 3C rep. Angela Bradbery to McLean Gardens Listserv:

The city late Monday informed the ANC that in response to community concerns about parking, it plans to build a bigger parking garage. Instead of two stories, it will be three. The additional layer of parking will provide an additional 60-80 spaces. This will be enough both for the shelter and for police, and should alleviate the current situation that forces the police to park their personal vehicles on the grass in front of the station and on neighborhood streets. The garage will be visible from the street; the height of the three-deck garage will be 34 feet, an estimated 10 to 15 feet above the height of the wall along Newark Street, according to the architect.

But the city needs a place for police to park while this deck is being constructed because there is not enough space onsite.

So the city plans to turn the tennis courts into surface parking lots during the 18 months of construction. At the end of the project, it will build new tennis courts.

For vehicles to reach the tennis courts while they are being used as parking lots, the city will need a road. So it is going to extend (and, I presume, widen) the small pathway that runs next to the playground and provides an entrance to the garden area and dog park from Newark Street. The new road will be extended to the tennis courts so police can drive in from Newark Street, park their vehicles and walk to the station.

The city cannot say how many garden plots will be paved over. But it says that this, too, will be temporary, and it will rebuild the garden plots when it is done. Knowing the nature of gardening (in the interest of full disclosure, I have a community garden plot), I have asked the city to provide details of how it would rebuild garden plots.

Below are additional questions that I and other ANC commissioners asked.

1
Why can’t the city lease spaces from Cathedral Commons? The city tried but spaces were not available.
2
What will this new plan cost? The original two-level garage was slated to cost $5.5 million. The additional level will cost another $4 million, for a total of $9.5 million for the three-level structure.
3
How will stormwater runoff from the temporary road into nearby garden plots be managed? The city cannot yet provide an answer.
4
What is the cost of rebuilding the tennis courts? That is to be determined.

Needless to say, these eleventh-hour changes to the plan raise a lot of new concerns for a new set of stakeholders. Given that, and the fact that there are so many questions the city cannot answer, I urged the city to delay its Board of Zoning Adjustment hearing for a month so that we can solicit input from gardeners, families who use the playground and dog park, and people who use the tennis courts.

The city refused. It is still set to go before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 1, but it no longer will seek a special exception for parking. (The city still seeks variances for building height, loading dock requirements, placing a second structure on a lot meant for one structure and using the property for a shelter). The city plans to file its amended BZA application on Wednesday.

The ANC still must make a recommendation on this project at its Feb. 21 meeting. Please email us at [e-mail] with your feedback.

Angela

Angela Bradbery
ANC3C06 Commissioner
[phone]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I don't understand is, why is the Ward 3 shelter designed to be about 50% larger than the other new shelters being built in the other wards? It's counter-intuitive, when Ward 3 has the smallest homeless population yet is getting the biggest shelter by capacity and size.

Is that so?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Message from ANC 3C rep. Angela Bradbery to McLean Gardens Listserv:

The city late Monday informed the ANC that in response to community concerns about parking, it plans to build a bigger parking garage. Instead of two stories, it will be three. The additional layer of parking will provide an additional 60-80 spaces. This will be enough both for the shelter and for police, and should alleviate the current situation that forces the police to park their personal vehicles on the grass in front of the station and on neighborhood streets. The garage will be visible from the street; the height of the three-deck garage will be 34 feet, an estimated 10 to 15 feet above the height of the wall along Newark Street, according to the architect.

But the city needs a place for police to park while this deck is being constructed because there is not enough space onsite.

So the city plans to turn the tennis courts into surface parking lots during the 18 months of construction. At the end of the project, it will build new tennis courts.

For vehicles to reach the tennis courts while they are being used as parking lots, the city will need a road. So it is going to extend (and, I presume, widen) the small pathway that runs next to the playground and provides an entrance to the garden area and dog park from Newark Street. The new road will be extended to the tennis courts so police can drive in from Newark Street, park their vehicles and walk to the station.

The city cannot say how many garden plots will be paved over. But it says that this, too, will be temporary, and it will rebuild the garden plots when it is done. Knowing the nature of gardening (in the interest of full disclosure, I have a community garden plot), I have asked the city to provide details of how it would rebuild garden plots.

Below are additional questions that I and other ANC commissioners asked.

1
Why can’t the city lease spaces from Cathedral Commons? The city tried but spaces were not available.
2
What will this new plan cost? The original two-level garage was slated to cost $5.5 million. The additional level will cost another $4 million, for a total of $9.5 million for the three-level structure.
3
How will stormwater runoff from the temporary road into nearby garden plots be managed? The city cannot yet provide an answer.
4
What is the cost of rebuilding the tennis courts? That is to be determined.

Needless to say, these eleventh-hour changes to the plan raise a lot of new concerns for a new set of stakeholders. Given that, and the fact that there are so many questions the city cannot answer, I urged the city to delay its Board of Zoning Adjustment hearing for a month so that we can solicit input from gardeners, families who use the playground and dog park, and people who use the tennis courts.

The city refused. It is still set to go before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 1, but it no longer will seek a special exception for parking. (The city still seeks variances for building height, loading dock requirements, placing a second structure on a lot meant for one structure and using the property for a shelter). The city plans to file its amended BZA application on Wednesday.

The ANC still must make a recommendation on this project at its Feb. 21 meeting. Please email us at [e-mail] with your feedback.

Angela

Angela Bradbery
ANC3C06 Commissioner
[phone]

So now, on top of everything else, DC needs to spend $9.5 million just for a parking garage at the site?! What a SNAFU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Message from ANC 3C rep. Angela Bradbery to McLean Gardens Listserv:

The city late Monday informed the ANC that in response to community concerns about parking, it plans to build a bigger parking garage. Instead of two stories, it will be three. The additional layer of parking will provide an additional 60-80 spaces. This will be enough both for the shelter and for police, and should alleviate the current situation that forces the police to park their personal vehicles on the grass in front of the station and on neighborhood streets. The garage will be visible from the street; the height of the three-deck garage will be 34 feet, an estimated 10 to 15 feet above the height of the wall along Newark Street, according to the architect.

But the city needs a place for police to park while this deck is being constructed because there is not enough space onsite.

So the city plans to turn the tennis courts into surface parking lots during the 18 months of construction. At the end of the project, it will build new tennis courts.

For vehicles to reach the tennis courts while they are being used as parking lots, the city will need a road. So it is going to extend (and, I presume, widen) the small pathway that runs next to the playground and provides an entrance to the garden area and dog park from Newark Street. The new road will be extended to the tennis courts so police can drive in from Newark Street, park their vehicles and walk to the station.

The city cannot say how many garden plots will be paved over. But it says that this, too, will be temporary, and it will rebuild the garden plots when it is done. Knowing the nature of gardening (in the interest of full disclosure, I have a community garden plot), I have asked the city to provide details of how it would rebuild garden plots.

Below are additional questions that I and other ANC commissioners asked.

1
Why can’t the city lease spaces from Cathedral Commons? The city tried but spaces were not available.
2
What will this new plan cost? The original two-level garage was slated to cost $5.5 million. The additional level will cost another $4 million, for a total of $9.5 million for the three-level structure.
3
How will stormwater runoff from the temporary road into nearby garden plots be managed? The city cannot yet provide an answer.
4
What is the cost of rebuilding the tennis courts? That is to be determined.

Needless to say, these eleventh-hour changes to the plan raise a lot of new concerns for a new set of stakeholders. Given that, and the fact that there are so many questions the city cannot answer, I urged the city to delay its Board of Zoning Adjustment hearing for a month so that we can solicit input from gardeners, families who use the playground and dog park, and people who use the tennis courts.

The city refused. It is still set to go before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 1, but it no longer will seek a special exception for parking. (The city still seeks variances for building height, loading dock requirements, placing a second structure on a lot meant for one structure and using the property for a shelter). The city plans to file its amended BZA application on Wednesday.

The ANC still must make a recommendation on this project at its Feb. 21 meeting. Please email us at [e-mail] with your feedback.

Angela

Angela Bradbery
ANC3C06 Commissioner
[phone]

So now, on top of everything else, DC needs to spend $9.5 million just for a parking garage at the site?! What a SNAFU.

So really what happened here was that a bunch of NIMBY's starting moaning about parking in an effort to create a new roadblock for the shelter. The whole idea was ridiculous, because there was plenty of parking in the original plan, and their concern was the existence of the shelter itself, not any parking problems related to it. But to address this NIMBY nonsense, the city ends up having to spend an extra $9.5 million and we lose green space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Message from ANC 3C rep. Angela Bradbery to McLean Gardens Listserv:

The city late Monday informed the ANC that in response to community concerns about parking, it plans to build a bigger parking garage. Instead of two stories, it will be three. The additional layer of parking will provide an additional 60-80 spaces. This will be enough both for the shelter and for police, and should alleviate the current situation that forces the police to park their personal vehicles on the grass in front of the station and on neighborhood streets. The garage will be visible from the street; the height of the three-deck garage will be 34 feet, an estimated 10 to 15 feet above the height of the wall along Newark Street, according to the architect.

But the city needs a place for police to park while this deck is being constructed because there is not enough space onsite.

So the city plans to turn the tennis courts into surface parking lots during the 18 months of construction. At the end of the project, it will build new tennis courts.

For vehicles to reach the tennis courts while they are being used as parking lots, the city will need a road. So it is going to extend (and, I presume, widen) the small pathway that runs next to the playground and provides an entrance to the garden area and dog park from Newark Street. The new road will be extended to the tennis courts so police can drive in from Newark Street, park their vehicles and walk to the station.

The city cannot say how many garden plots will be paved over. But it says that this, too, will be temporary, and it will rebuild the garden plots when it is done. Knowing the nature of gardening (in the interest of full disclosure, I have a community garden plot), I have asked the city to provide details of how it would rebuild garden plots.

Below are additional questions that I and other ANC commissioners asked.

1
Why can’t the city lease spaces from Cathedral Commons? The city tried but spaces were not available.
2
What will this new plan cost? The original two-level garage was slated to cost $5.5 million. The additional level will cost another $4 million, for a total of $9.5 million for the three-level structure.
3
How will stormwater runoff from the temporary road into nearby garden plots be managed? The city cannot yet provide an answer.
4
What is the cost of rebuilding the tennis courts? That is to be determined.

Needless to say, these eleventh-hour changes to the plan raise a lot of new concerns for a new set of stakeholders. Given that, and the fact that there are so many questions the city cannot answer, I urged the city to delay its Board of Zoning Adjustment hearing for a month so that we can solicit input from gardeners, families who use the playground and dog park, and people who use the tennis courts.

The city refused. It is still set to go before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 1, but it no longer will seek a special exception for parking. (The city still seeks variances for building height, loading dock requirements, placing a second structure on a lot meant for one structure and using the property for a shelter). The city plans to file its amended BZA application on Wednesday.

The ANC still must make a recommendation on this project at its Feb. 21 meeting. Please email us at [e-mail] with your feedback.

Angela

Angela Bradbery
ANC3C06 Commissioner
[phone]

So now, on top of everything else, DC needs to spend $9.5 million just for a parking garage at the site?! What a SNAFU.

The whole program smells corruption and nepotism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Message from ANC 3C rep. Angela Bradbery to McLean Gardens Listserv:

The city late Monday informed the ANC that in response to community concerns about parking, it plans to build a bigger parking garage. Instead of two stories, it will be three. The additional layer of parking will provide an additional 60-80 spaces. This will be enough both for the shelter and for police, and should alleviate the current situation that forces the police to park their personal vehicles on the grass in front of the station and on neighborhood streets. The garage will be visible from the street; the height of the three-deck garage will be 34 feet, an estimated 10 to 15 feet above the height of the wall along Newark Street, according to the architect.

But the city needs a place for police to park while this deck is being constructed because there is not enough space onsite.

So the city plans to turn the tennis courts into surface parking lots during the 18 months of construction. At the end of the project, it will build new tennis courts.

For vehicles to reach the tennis courts while they are being used as parking lots, the city will need a road. So it is going to extend (and, I presume, widen) the small pathway that runs next to the playground and provides an entrance to the garden area and dog park from Newark Street. The new road will be extended to the tennis courts so police can drive in from Newark Street, park their vehicles and walk to the station.

The city cannot say how many garden plots will be paved over. But it says that this, too, will be temporary, and it will rebuild the garden plots when it is done. Knowing the nature of gardening (in the interest of full disclosure, I have a community garden plot), I have asked the city to provide details of how it would rebuild garden plots.

Below are additional questions that I and other ANC commissioners asked.

1
Why can’t the city lease spaces from Cathedral Commons? The city tried but spaces were not available.
2
What will this new plan cost? The original two-level garage was slated to cost $5.5 million. The additional level will cost another $4 million, for a total of $9.5 million for the three-level structure.
3
How will stormwater runoff from the temporary road into nearby garden plots be managed? The city cannot yet provide an answer.
4
What is the cost of rebuilding the tennis courts? That is to be determined.

Needless to say, these eleventh-hour changes to the plan raise a lot of new concerns for a new set of stakeholders. Given that, and the fact that there are so many questions the city cannot answer, I urged the city to delay its Board of Zoning Adjustment hearing for a month so that we can solicit input from gardeners, families who use the playground and dog park, and people who use the tennis courts.

The city refused. It is still set to go before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 1, but it no longer will seek a special exception for parking. (The city still seeks variances for building height, loading dock requirements, placing a second structure on a lot meant for one structure and using the property for a shelter). The city plans to file its amended BZA application on Wednesday.

The ANC still must make a recommendation on this project at its Feb. 21 meeting. Please email us at [e-mail] with your feedback.

Angela

Angela Bradbery
ANC3C06 Commissioner
[phone]

So now, on top of everything else, DC needs to spend $9.5 million just for a parking garage at the site?! What a SNAFU.

So really what happened here was that a bunch of NIMBY's starting moaning about parking in an effort to create a new roadblock for the shelter. The whole idea was ridiculous, because there was plenty of parking in the original plan, and their concern was the existence of the shelter itself, not any parking problems related to it. But to address this NIMBY nonsense, the city ends up having to spend an extra $9.5 million and we lose green space.

No, the problem, as DC's DGS noted in a report before the rushed Council vote, is that this site is not suitable for the homeless shelter. Putting the shelter in the middle of an overcrowded police parking lot, sandwiched next to the station, is not the brightest move. Despite her lofty opinion of her own intellect, Mary Cheh is a mere law professor -- she's no engineer or rocket scientist.

[Anonymous]

I think my liberal CP neighbors are only giving in theory. When it comes to living what they preach, they sign petitions and fight tooth and nail to have those pesky homeless as far away from them as possible. Shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think my liberal CP neighbors are only giving in theory. When it comes to living what they preach, they sign petitions and fight tooth and nail to have those pesky homeless as far away from them as possible. Shameful.

I feel sorry for the people in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. First the Idaho folks got a semi-trailer loading dock for Cathedral Commons next to their homes, in a RESIDENTIAL zone, no less. They put up with two years of construction at Cathedral Commons and now have to deal with the traffic that goes there. Next they'll have a six-story shelter build next to their homes, and now there will be a three story concrete parking garage next to it. To top it off, they'll lose access to a recreation facility and garden for two years. The worst it, this was all done by decree. There was no public process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think my liberal CP neighbors are only giving in theory. When it comes to living what they preach, they sign petitions and fight tooth and nail to have those pesky homeless as far away from them as possible. Shameful.

I feel sorry for the people in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. First the Idaho folks got a semi-trailer loading dock for Cathedral Commons next to their homes, in a RESIDENTIAL zone, no less. They put up with two years of construction at Cathedral Commons and now have to deal with the traffic that goes there. Next they'll have a six-story shelter build next to their homes, and now there will be a three story concrete parking garage next to it. To top it off, they'll lose access to a recreation facility and garden for two years. The worst it, this was all done by decree. There was no public process.

Buildings go up in the city all the time. It's part of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think my liberal CP neighbors are only giving in theory. When it comes to living what they preach, they sign petitions and fight tooth and nail to have those pesky homeless as far away from them as possible. Shameful.

I feel sorry for the people in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. First the Idaho folks got a semi-trailer loading dock for Cathedral Commons next to their homes, in a RESIDENTIAL zone, no less. They put up with two years of construction at Cathedral Commons and now have to deal with the traffic that goes there. Next they'll have a six-story shelter build next to their homes, and now there will be a three story concrete parking garage next to it. To top it off, they'll lose access to a recreation facility and garden for two years. The worst it, this was all done by decree. There was no public process.

Buildings go up in the city all the time. It's part of life.

This is why we have zoning, for sound planning and so that investors and residents can have more settled expectations. A tractor-trailer facility in a residential zone is not allowed. A six-story building (plus mechanical story) is not allowed in a zone that limits height effectively to less than half that. In both cases, special exceptions were or are being sought, to go around zoning. In a major sense, this violates the covenant of fairness with those who purchase homes relying on zoning -- although in DC, it's not uncommon to see settled expectations and protection of rights slide away on greased skids (and palms?).