ANC 3/4G recently signed a letter of agreement with the owners of the parcel at Connecticut Avenue and Military Road for a new residential development. Nearby neighbors have appealed the issuance of construction permits by DCRA. The Board of Zoning Adjustment will hear the case later in September, but in the meantime, the neighborhood group has shared its BZA filing.
Any zoning lawyers interested in weighing in on the merits of the appeal?
Showing posts with label Chevy Chase. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chevy Chase. Show all posts
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Monday, August 26, 2013
Resolution to Controversy in Chevy Chase?
It appears there may be a light at the end of the tunnel where 5333 Connecticut Avenue is concerned. This proposal has had its share of controversy in upper Ward 3 where new development is often considered a dirty word.
Nearby neighbors have filed appeals with the BZA and other DC authorities over the permits issued in 2012 and 2103 for a highrise building in the last open lot on this main thoroughfare.
The Chevy Chase ANC has taken a different tact. By engaging the property owner, they have arrived at a somewhat decent "Memorandum of Understanding" and are encouraging the appeals by neighbors to be dropped.
Among the good points of the MOU:
- A redesign of the glassy exterior to something more compatible with the existing building stock;
- Additional landscaping;
- Support and potential payment for car sharing and Capital Bikeshare on site;
- A 13 point environmental sustainability program.
The agreement does come with some negatives. Among them:
- The reduction, by 2, of the number of living units;
- The inclusion of a circular driveway on Connecticut Avenue, with two curb cuts;
- The addition of 40 additional parking spaces, over and above the proposal, which was more than was required by zoning.
This is somewhat novel approach taken by the ANC, but ultimately, it is probably more productive than the alternatives. The ANC will discuss this at its meeting on Tuesday, August 27th, see the ANC 3G website for more information.
EDIT
And this statement from the project opponents:
At the encouragement of the Chevy Chase Advisory Neighborhood Commission,
members of 5333 CNC, the commission and the Cafritz development group spent the
summer seeking agreement on changes to the developers’ proposed all-glass
apartment tower, ones that would protect the vibrant Chevy Chase D.C. community
while encouraging growth and development.
At the insistence of the Cafritzes, everybody involved in the effort had to sign
pledges of confidentiality.
The sessions were intended to produce a reasonable compromise between the
residents and the Cafritzes.
Instead, they have resulted in a draft agreement between the Cafritzes and the
ANC that doesn’t address the community’s most important requests for change and
could be damaging to the community’s appeals of the developers’ plans.
The ANC is scheduled to take up the 15-point draft Tuesday, August 27 at 7:30
p.m. The 5333 Connecticut Neighborhood Coalition asks community residents to
turn out for the meeting and judge for themselves.
Last spring, the ANC joined the 5333 CNC in appealing municipal permits that the
developer obtained for the proposed structure and helped to convene negotiations
between the coalition and Cafritz representatives.
Throughout the negotiations, the coalition proposed practical, modest changes
that would not require wholesale redesign. Among them: shifting the mass of the
large Military Road wing of the proposed building forward toward Connecticut and
stepping down the back of the wing to create a buffer between the 10-story
development and the two-to-three story surrounding single-families homes.
As it now appears, ANC commissioners engaged in a separate negotiation with the
Cafritz side about which the 5333 CNC was not told. The resulting agreement
fails to address key issues in the 5333 CNC-Cafritz negotiations, is vague,
unenforceable and makes new concessions to the developer with little in return
for the community.
Below is a brief review of some of the key points included in the draft
Cafritz-ANC agreement that the commission intends to consider.
The draft says the Cafritzes agree to “a major redesign of the building…
including reduction in the glass surface area (and) increase in the amount of
masonry…as depicted in concept drawings that Cafritz provided.”
However, the agreement doesn't call for the Cafritzes to withdraw the current
building permit, which doesn’t reflect any of the changes the draft says the
developers have agreed to make. The current permit is for the original structure
that was widely criticized by the community and the ANC.
The agreement also doesn't call for the Cafritzes to make publicly available a
full set of drawings and plans for a building that reflects the proposed
changes. The developers have been promising to provide the public with revised
plans since the beginning of 2013, but have yet to do so. Absent a full set of
plans and drawings, the community will be left to discuss, and the ANC to vote
on, a proposal with little more than a few potentially inaccurate pictures.
The agreement doesn't require the Cafritzes to hold off on construction until a
new permit that reflects all of the changes to which they say they've agreed has
been approved by the city and reviewed by the commission and the community.
The draft says that the Cafritzes will seek, and the ANC will support, an
application for a circular driveway in front of the Connecticut Avenue façade in
order to “reduce traffic on Kanawha Street and Military Road…”
The city’s Department of Transportation (DDOT) already has rejected a request
for such a driveway as a danger to pedestrians trying to make their way along
Connecticut and an impediment to traffic flow along the avenue. Despite the
developer’s claims, inclusion of such a driveway would not reduce traffic on
Military or Kanawha.
The Cafritzes’ insistence on the driveway appears to be the reason they refuse
to comply with a basic rule of urban design by moving the structure forward so
it fronts on Connecticut and defines the urban corridor. It also appears to be
the reason they won’t agree to the kind of buffer zone between the high-rise and
surrounding single family homes that virtually all well-designed apartment
buildings along Connecticut have.
The driveway is one of the few elements of the Cafritz development in which the
community has an opportunity to make a mutually beneficial trade-off:
neighborhood support for the driveway in return for coupling it with a secondary
entrance/exit to the proposed structure’s underground parking to relieve some,
but not all, of the traffic along Military and Kanawha. Absent this coupling,
ANC support would simply give away a legitimate bargaining chip.
Advocates of the draft agreement suggest that the Cafritzes will prohibit
tenants of the proposed structure from getting residential parking sticker that
would let them save the expense of renting a space in the proposed structure’s
underground garage and parking on the street.
But the agreement itself says only that the Cafritzes “will request” such an
arrangement, which means the provision would be unenforceable.
The draft says the Cafritzes agree “to install additional landscaping,”
including preserving existing tall, mature trees that could serve as an
effective shield against light pollution and protect privacy, especially along
the huge Military Road side of the building.
However after initially saying that seven mature trees located in public space
along Military could be saved, the Cafitzes’ landscape architect sent a memo
reducing that number to three and even then only promising "reasonable best
efforts." None would be saved along Kanawha. The new trees that the landscape
architect proposes to add either would be too small to provide much shielding,
or don’t grow the kind of full, protective canopies portrayed in the concept
drawings.
The draft includes a variety of proposals that appear aimed at allowing the
Cafritzes to claim that their proposed building would be environmentally sound.
However, the developers had already said they’d use “green” technology (although
not meet nationally recognized green LEEDS standards). The only new elements
appear to be mention of adding a Capital Bike Share rack and space for two
Zipcars on the property.
The text of the draft also says the Cafritzes “shall have no obligation” to
include either “if after a reasonable effort” they decide inclusion of one or
both is impractical.
The draft says that the developers agree to “institute traffic controls and
signage, as requested and advised by the DDOT, so that traffic entering and
exiting the building will not use the narrow alley that runs from behind the
Building to Chevy Chase Parkway.”
However, the Cafritzes agreed in early conversations with the ANC and the
coalition to install a so-called “pork chop” traffic control to discourage use
of the alley. The draft appears to weaken, not strengthen, that agreement by
making it contingent on the city’s transportation department requesting the
traffic control. Senior DDOT officials have repeatedly described the alley as
“public infrastructure” that should be put to greater use. As a result, it
seems unlikely that they will “request” any control.
Members of the 5333 CNC appreciate the ANC’s efforts to encourage negotiations
between the community and the Cafritzes. But the secret negotiations between
the ANC and the Cafritzes that have resulted in limited, inadequately defined
and unenforceable promises of change are counterproductive and a disservice to
our community.
Nearby neighbors have filed appeals with the BZA and other DC authorities over the permits issued in 2012 and 2103 for a highrise building in the last open lot on this main thoroughfare.
The Chevy Chase ANC has taken a different tact. By engaging the property owner, they have arrived at a somewhat decent "Memorandum of Understanding" and are encouraging the appeals by neighbors to be dropped.
Among the good points of the MOU:
- A redesign of the glassy exterior to something more compatible with the existing building stock;
- Additional landscaping;
- Support and potential payment for car sharing and Capital Bikeshare on site;
- A 13 point environmental sustainability program.
The agreement does come with some negatives. Among them:
- The reduction, by 2, of the number of living units;
- The inclusion of a circular driveway on Connecticut Avenue, with two curb cuts;
- The addition of 40 additional parking spaces, over and above the proposal, which was more than was required by zoning.
This is somewhat novel approach taken by the ANC, but ultimately, it is probably more productive than the alternatives. The ANC will discuss this at its meeting on Tuesday, August 27th, see the ANC 3G website for more information.
EDIT
And this statement from the project opponents:
At the encouragement of the Chevy Chase Advisory Neighborhood Commission,
members of 5333 CNC, the commission and the Cafritz development group spent the
summer seeking agreement on changes to the developers’ proposed all-glass
apartment tower, ones that would protect the vibrant Chevy Chase D.C. community
while encouraging growth and development.
At the insistence of the Cafritzes, everybody involved in the effort had to sign
pledges of confidentiality.
The sessions were intended to produce a reasonable compromise between the
residents and the Cafritzes.
Instead, they have resulted in a draft agreement between the Cafritzes and the
ANC that doesn’t address the community’s most important requests for change and
could be damaging to the community’s appeals of the developers’ plans.
The ANC is scheduled to take up the 15-point draft Tuesday, August 27 at 7:30
p.m. The 5333 Connecticut Neighborhood Coalition asks community residents to
turn out for the meeting and judge for themselves.
Last spring, the ANC joined the 5333 CNC in appealing municipal permits that the
developer obtained for the proposed structure and helped to convene negotiations
between the coalition and Cafritz representatives.
Throughout the negotiations, the coalition proposed practical, modest changes
that would not require wholesale redesign. Among them: shifting the mass of the
large Military Road wing of the proposed building forward toward Connecticut and
stepping down the back of the wing to create a buffer between the 10-story
development and the two-to-three story surrounding single-families homes.
As it now appears, ANC commissioners engaged in a separate negotiation with the
Cafritz side about which the 5333 CNC was not told. The resulting agreement
fails to address key issues in the 5333 CNC-Cafritz negotiations, is vague,
unenforceable and makes new concessions to the developer with little in return
for the community.
Below is a brief review of some of the key points included in the draft
Cafritz-ANC agreement that the commission intends to consider.
The draft says the Cafritzes agree to “a major redesign of the building…
including reduction in the glass surface area (and) increase in the amount of
masonry…as depicted in concept drawings that Cafritz provided.”
However, the agreement doesn't call for the Cafritzes to withdraw the current
building permit, which doesn’t reflect any of the changes the draft says the
developers have agreed to make. The current permit is for the original structure
that was widely criticized by the community and the ANC.
The agreement also doesn't call for the Cafritzes to make publicly available a
full set of drawings and plans for a building that reflects the proposed
changes. The developers have been promising to provide the public with revised
plans since the beginning of 2013, but have yet to do so. Absent a full set of
plans and drawings, the community will be left to discuss, and the ANC to vote
on, a proposal with little more than a few potentially inaccurate pictures.
The agreement doesn't require the Cafritzes to hold off on construction until a
new permit that reflects all of the changes to which they say they've agreed has
been approved by the city and reviewed by the commission and the community.
The draft says that the Cafritzes will seek, and the ANC will support, an
application for a circular driveway in front of the Connecticut Avenue façade in
order to “reduce traffic on Kanawha Street and Military Road…”
The city’s Department of Transportation (DDOT) already has rejected a request
for such a driveway as a danger to pedestrians trying to make their way along
Connecticut and an impediment to traffic flow along the avenue. Despite the
developer’s claims, inclusion of such a driveway would not reduce traffic on
Military or Kanawha.
The Cafritzes’ insistence on the driveway appears to be the reason they refuse
to comply with a basic rule of urban design by moving the structure forward so
it fronts on Connecticut and defines the urban corridor. It also appears to be
the reason they won’t agree to the kind of buffer zone between the high-rise and
surrounding single family homes that virtually all well-designed apartment
buildings along Connecticut have.
The driveway is one of the few elements of the Cafritz development in which the
community has an opportunity to make a mutually beneficial trade-off:
neighborhood support for the driveway in return for coupling it with a secondary
entrance/exit to the proposed structure’s underground parking to relieve some,
but not all, of the traffic along Military and Kanawha. Absent this coupling,
ANC support would simply give away a legitimate bargaining chip.
Advocates of the draft agreement suggest that the Cafritzes will prohibit
tenants of the proposed structure from getting residential parking sticker that
would let them save the expense of renting a space in the proposed structure’s
underground garage and parking on the street.
But the agreement itself says only that the Cafritzes “will request” such an
arrangement, which means the provision would be unenforceable.
The draft says the Cafritzes agree “to install additional landscaping,”
including preserving existing tall, mature trees that could serve as an
effective shield against light pollution and protect privacy, especially along
the huge Military Road side of the building.
However after initially saying that seven mature trees located in public space
along Military could be saved, the Cafitzes’ landscape architect sent a memo
reducing that number to three and even then only promising "reasonable best
efforts." None would be saved along Kanawha. The new trees that the landscape
architect proposes to add either would be too small to provide much shielding,
or don’t grow the kind of full, protective canopies portrayed in the concept
drawings.
The draft includes a variety of proposals that appear aimed at allowing the
Cafritzes to claim that their proposed building would be environmentally sound.
However, the developers had already said they’d use “green” technology (although
not meet nationally recognized green LEEDS standards). The only new elements
appear to be mention of adding a Capital Bike Share rack and space for two
Zipcars on the property.
The text of the draft also says the Cafritzes “shall have no obligation” to
include either “if after a reasonable effort” they decide inclusion of one or
both is impractical.
The draft says that the developers agree to “institute traffic controls and
signage, as requested and advised by the DDOT, so that traffic entering and
exiting the building will not use the narrow alley that runs from behind the
Building to Chevy Chase Parkway.”
However, the Cafritzes agreed in early conversations with the ANC and the
coalition to install a so-called “pork chop” traffic control to discourage use
of the alley. The draft appears to weaken, not strengthen, that agreement by
making it contingent on the city’s transportation department requesting the
traffic control. Senior DDOT officials have repeatedly described the alley as
“public infrastructure” that should be put to greater use. As a result, it
seems unlikely that they will “request” any control.
Members of the 5333 CNC appreciate the ANC’s efforts to encourage negotiations
between the community and the Cafritzes. But the secret negotiations between
the ANC and the Cafritzes that have resulted in limited, inadequately defined
and unenforceable promises of change are counterproductive and a disservice to
our community.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Pepco Upgrades in the Area
From ANC 3F:
Pepco is working hard to provide safe and reliable electrical service to our valued customers and to support the needs of our region. As a part of this commitment, we will be upgrading existing infrastructure in areas near Friendship Heights.
Pepco has a three-phase project scheduled to start in your community in the next few weeks (Phase 1). This project involves:
Upgrading three primary lines (higher-voltage feeder lines that carry power to about 1,100 customers in a specific area) to more than triple their capacity, from 4 kilovolt (kV) to 13 kV
Alleviating load from the Harrison Substation by transferring three 4 kV feeders to the Oliver Substation. This work is similar to other 4 kV conversion projects completed throughout the District of Columbia.
We have enclosed a map that outlines the areas in your community that will be affected by this work. Portions of Phase 1 will occur in ANC 3F, Phase 2 and 3 are not in ANC 3F.
Phase 1
In the first phase of this project, we will construct a new 13 kV feeder to allow the transfer of the three 4 kV Harrison Substation feeders to the Van Ness Substation. On the attached map, the pink line shows the location of this new feeder. Pepco will use an existing underground conduit to install about 7,000 feet of new cable. By using an existing conduit, we’ll minimize the area we have to excavate. We also will install one new cable pole on 41st St. N.W., just north of Fesseden Street. This pole will be the transition point between the underground cable installed in phase 1 and the overhead 13 kV feeders discussed in phase 2. Finally, we will construct a new manhole to house equipment near the intersection of Wisconsin Avenue and Fesseden Street N.W. We expect to start this phase in two weeks and take about six to eight weeks.
Phase 2
In the second phase, we will convert three 4 kV feeders to 13 kV and remove the 4kV infrastructure. On the map, the green line outlines this work. To convert the feeders, we will set a new 13kV pole line next to the existing 4 kV pole line. Once the new poles are in place and the pole hardware is mounted, we will install the overhead 13 kV lines and connect them to the 13 kV underground feeder that was extended from the Van Ness Substation. After we energize the new lines, we will remove the existing 4 kV infrastructure. We will need to trim trees to be able to install the new lines. Our arborist is meeting with the District Department of Transportation’s Urban Forestry Administration to identify which trees might need to be pruned or removed, and we will share a list of those trees with the Advisory Neighborhood Commission. We expect to start work in April on this phase, which is expected to take about six to nine months to complete. Field inspections may require changes to work locations. We will provide an update should this occur.
Phase 3
The last phase will be to transfer three 4 kV feeder lines from the Harrison Substation to the Oliver Substation. This work is shown on the map with the light blue line. We will construct new conduits and manholes to house the new cables between these two substations. We expect to start work on this phase in June, and it will take six to nine months.
We at Pepco are committed to keep you updated throughout this project. We’ll dedicate a page on our pepco.com website to provide project details, including work locations, hours, and impacts on parking and traffic. We’ll perform the work as efficiently as possible. Please note that we’ll have to finish work on specific cable sections before moving to a new section, so residents should not expect to see our crews in one location for the entire phase. We would be happy to present these plans to you at an ANC meeting. If you have any questions or concerns in the meantime, please contact us. This information will also be provided to other impacted Advisory Neighborhood Commissions.
Pepco is working hard to provide safe and reliable electrical service to our valued customers and to support the needs of our region. As a part of this commitment, we will be upgrading existing infrastructure in areas near Friendship Heights.
Pepco has a three-phase project scheduled to start in your community in the next few weeks (Phase 1). This project involves:
Upgrading three primary lines (higher-voltage feeder lines that carry power to about 1,100 customers in a specific area) to more than triple their capacity, from 4 kilovolt (kV) to 13 kV
Alleviating load from the Harrison Substation by transferring three 4 kV feeders to the Oliver Substation. This work is similar to other 4 kV conversion projects completed throughout the District of Columbia.
We have enclosed a map that outlines the areas in your community that will be affected by this work. Portions of Phase 1 will occur in ANC 3F, Phase 2 and 3 are not in ANC 3F.
Phase 1
In the first phase of this project, we will construct a new 13 kV feeder to allow the transfer of the three 4 kV Harrison Substation feeders to the Van Ness Substation. On the attached map, the pink line shows the location of this new feeder. Pepco will use an existing underground conduit to install about 7,000 feet of new cable. By using an existing conduit, we’ll minimize the area we have to excavate. We also will install one new cable pole on 41st St. N.W., just north of Fesseden Street. This pole will be the transition point between the underground cable installed in phase 1 and the overhead 13 kV feeders discussed in phase 2. Finally, we will construct a new manhole to house equipment near the intersection of Wisconsin Avenue and Fesseden Street N.W. We expect to start this phase in two weeks and take about six to eight weeks.
Phase 2
In the second phase, we will convert three 4 kV feeders to 13 kV and remove the 4kV infrastructure. On the map, the green line outlines this work. To convert the feeders, we will set a new 13kV pole line next to the existing 4 kV pole line. Once the new poles are in place and the pole hardware is mounted, we will install the overhead 13 kV lines and connect them to the 13 kV underground feeder that was extended from the Van Ness Substation. After we energize the new lines, we will remove the existing 4 kV infrastructure. We will need to trim trees to be able to install the new lines. Our arborist is meeting with the District Department of Transportation’s Urban Forestry Administration to identify which trees might need to be pruned or removed, and we will share a list of those trees with the Advisory Neighborhood Commission. We expect to start work in April on this phase, which is expected to take about six to nine months to complete. Field inspections may require changes to work locations. We will provide an update should this occur.
Phase 3
The last phase will be to transfer three 4 kV feeder lines from the Harrison Substation to the Oliver Substation. This work is shown on the map with the light blue line. We will construct new conduits and manholes to house the new cables between these two substations. We expect to start work on this phase in June, and it will take six to nine months.
We at Pepco are committed to keep you updated throughout this project. We’ll dedicate a page on our pepco.com website to provide project details, including work locations, hours, and impacts on parking and traffic. We’ll perform the work as efficiently as possible. Please note that we’ll have to finish work on specific cable sections before moving to a new section, so residents should not expect to see our crews in one location for the entire phase. We would be happy to present these plans to you at an ANC meeting. If you have any questions or concerns in the meantime, please contact us. This information will also be provided to other impacted Advisory Neighborhood Commissions.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Chevy Chase Development
There has been some chatter on the Chevy Chase Listserv about a development proposal for the large tract of undeveloped land bordered by Connecticut Avenue, Military Road and Kanawha Street. Known now as 5333 Connecticut Avenue, the local residents are attempting to raise concerns with city officials through a petition campaign.
Unlike other development proposals such as Cathedral Commons or The Bond which required Zoning Commission review, this project is being proposed by the developer as a matter of right proposition. In other words, there appears to be little to no opportunity for public input because the proposal complies in every way with current zoning rules.
On the listserv, one resident suggests:
Chevy Chase’s largest development in perhaps a half century is on the verge of
breaking ground without an iota of local input, or even any notice.
Many neighbors think this is just plan unfair. And they’re going door to door
beginning this weekend with what information about the project we've been able
to gather in the days since we first learned of it. They’ll also have petitions
and letters calling on Mary Cheh, our councilmember, Mayor Gray and Nicholas
Majett, the head of the city department that's been handing out municipal
approvals for the project, to help us get our concerns heard and addressed.
So it begs the question, what is appropriate in this case? Even though it is a matter of right development, should there be opportunity for residents to have a recourse? Are there extenuating circumstances that the rest of the public isn't aware of? Is there any irony that many of these same residents probably opposed the historic district proposal, which may have had impact on the scale of the development proposal?
Unlike other development proposals such as Cathedral Commons or The Bond which required Zoning Commission review, this project is being proposed by the developer as a matter of right proposition. In other words, there appears to be little to no opportunity for public input because the proposal complies in every way with current zoning rules.
On the listserv, one resident suggests:
Chevy Chase’s largest development in perhaps a half century is on the verge of
breaking ground without an iota of local input, or even any notice.
Many neighbors think this is just plan unfair. And they’re going door to door
beginning this weekend with what information about the project we've been able
to gather in the days since we first learned of it. They’ll also have petitions
and letters calling on Mary Cheh, our councilmember, Mayor Gray and Nicholas
Majett, the head of the city department that's been handing out municipal
approvals for the project, to help us get our concerns heard and addressed.
So it begs the question, what is appropriate in this case? Even though it is a matter of right development, should there be opportunity for residents to have a recourse? Are there extenuating circumstances that the rest of the public isn't aware of? Is there any irony that many of these same residents probably opposed the historic district proposal, which may have had impact on the scale of the development proposal?
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Forest Hills and Bike Lanes
The Forest Hills Connection has a description and survey for alterations to Broadbranch Road connecting Beech Drive in Rock Creek Park to Linnean Avenue in Forest Hills/Chevy Chase.
This is a good opportunity to learn more about the proposals and weigh in. There is also an official website with contact information for the consulting engineers.
This is a good opportunity to learn more about the proposals and weigh in. There is also an official website with contact information for the consulting engineers.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Dear DDOT, How Did this Happen?
Former ANC Commissioner Chris Fromboluti posted the following on the Chevy Chase Listerv:
Dear ANC Commissioner Henry Griffin:
Recently I returned from a short vacation to find that Kanawha Street had been made one way Eastbound between Connecticut Avenue and 38th Street NW. I have polled a number of neighbors and residents of the affected block and all are annoyed at the change and none had been notified nor informed that this change was in the works.
This new traffic pattern is very inconvenient for all who live in the immediate area. It means that residents can no longer turn onto Kanawha from Connecticut but have to take a roundabout route to get to their destination. This in turn adds traffic to the streets that we now have to detour through. It just doesn't make any sense.
Per my experience as a former Commissioner, any change to street configuration is always vetted with the affected neighborhood to gauge citizen reaction before it is enacted. Were you or the ANC aware of this action? If yes we would appreciate knowing why no-one was notified in advance. If, as I suspect, you knew nothing about this I would appreciate an investigation into this very irregular procedure.
So if this is correct, DDOT, possibly in conjunction or advice and consent of ANC 3/4G Commissioners, has altered the configuration of a street in the grid in upper Northwest to be one-way, causing residents to significantly alter their driving patterns adding unnecessary traffic to adjacent streets. This appears to be without any notice to the community for discussion. To wit, a quick search of the ANC 3/4 G website suggests nary an agenda item or minutes indicating any sort of public notice.
Rumors in the community are that the local Single Member District Commissioner was fully aware and advocating for this change.
Seriously, how does this happen without a peep to the broader community? What happens if or when other residents or ANC Commissioners decide they want significant changes to their streets? What is the process for making a street one-way? Was Councilmember Cheh's office aware of this?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Dear ANC Commissioner Henry Griffin:
Recently I returned from a short vacation to find that Kanawha Street had been made one way Eastbound between Connecticut Avenue and 38th Street NW. I have polled a number of neighbors and residents of the affected block and all are annoyed at the change and none had been notified nor informed that this change was in the works.
This new traffic pattern is very inconvenient for all who live in the immediate area. It means that residents can no longer turn onto Kanawha from Connecticut but have to take a roundabout route to get to their destination. This in turn adds traffic to the streets that we now have to detour through. It just doesn't make any sense.
Per my experience as a former Commissioner, any change to street configuration is always vetted with the affected neighborhood to gauge citizen reaction before it is enacted. Were you or the ANC aware of this action? If yes we would appreciate knowing why no-one was notified in advance. If, as I suspect, you knew nothing about this I would appreciate an investigation into this very irregular procedure.
So if this is correct, DDOT, possibly in conjunction or advice and consent of ANC 3/4G Commissioners, has altered the configuration of a street in the grid in upper Northwest to be one-way, causing residents to significantly alter their driving patterns adding unnecessary traffic to adjacent streets. This appears to be without any notice to the community for discussion. To wit, a quick search of the ANC 3/4 G website suggests nary an agenda item or minutes indicating any sort of public notice.
Rumors in the community are that the local Single Member District Commissioner was fully aware and advocating for this change.
Seriously, how does this happen without a peep to the broader community? What happens if or when other residents or ANC Commissioners decide they want significant changes to their streets? What is the process for making a street one-way? Was Councilmember Cheh's office aware of this?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Chevy Chase Park Meeting
Rhere will be a community meeting tonight (7/26) at 6:30PM with DPR regarding Livingston Street Park. During this meeting DPR will review the additions to the park, areas that need attention, and the timeline for repairs or remaining installations (spray park, sand box, benches, etc.).
Who: DPR Staff, Director Aguirre, CM Mary Cheh and Community
When: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 6:30 PM
Where: Chevy Chase Community Center Multi-Purpose Room
5601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Who: DPR Staff, Director Aguirre, CM Mary Cheh and Community
When: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 6:30 PM
Where: Chevy Chase Community Center Multi-Purpose Room
5601 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
NW Current: Threat of razing sparks outcry on Jocelyn
The July 6, 2011 edition of the NW Current has an article entitled "Threat of razing sparks outcry on Jocelyn". The Brady Holt piece describes the efforts of residents in the vicinity of 3901 Jocelyn Street who are opposing the raze permit submitted by developers earlier this summer upon purchasing the 10,000+ lot and house.
Recall the effort in 2007 by Historic Chevy Chase DC to create a historic district in anticipation of the neighborhood centennial. The effort proved to be too controversial and the application was never formally submitted to the Historic Preservation Office.
During the debate, one Historic District supporter suggested or better, warned about a coming "tipping point" in local neighborhood economics:
Rampant teardowns are triggered when a neighborhood reaches a tipping point on land economics. In our neighborhood (20015), the average price for an existing home is about $900,000. As a developer, I have calculated that when a homebuilder can reasonably expect to get about $1,800,000 for a new McMansion, he could afford to pay $900,000 for an existing historic house as if it were a vacant, buildable lot. As recent sale prices on the upper end demonstrate, we are getting dangerously close to this tipping point. And once we hit the tipping point, there is no going back, as has been seen by the rapid demolition of homes in places like residential Bethesda. It is worth setting up protections now, before we reach that point, rather than trying to fix it retroactively.
Given the number of new houses and teardowns on Jenifer Street, Nevada Avenue and Tennyson Street, these words from 2007 seem more prescient than ever.
Recall the effort in 2007 by Historic Chevy Chase DC to create a historic district in anticipation of the neighborhood centennial. The effort proved to be too controversial and the application was never formally submitted to the Historic Preservation Office.
During the debate, one Historic District supporter suggested or better, warned about a coming "tipping point" in local neighborhood economics:
Rampant teardowns are triggered when a neighborhood reaches a tipping point on land economics. In our neighborhood (20015), the average price for an existing home is about $900,000. As a developer, I have calculated that when a homebuilder can reasonably expect to get about $1,800,000 for a new McMansion, he could afford to pay $900,000 for an existing historic house as if it were a vacant, buildable lot. As recent sale prices on the upper end demonstrate, we are getting dangerously close to this tipping point. And once we hit the tipping point, there is no going back, as has been seen by the rapid demolition of homes in places like residential Bethesda. It is worth setting up protections now, before we reach that point, rather than trying to fix it retroactively.
Given the number of new houses and teardowns on Jenifer Street, Nevada Avenue and Tennyson Street, these words from 2007 seem more prescient than ever.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Chevy Chase Parkway: WARNING
Recall the vitriol within the Chevy Chase community when DDOT proposed installing speed humps as a traffic calming measure on Chevy Chase's Morrison Street. Those humps were installed essentially at the request (see Feb 25, 2008 Minutes, cited here) of the ANC. Then DDOT Director Emeke Moneme came to an ANC 3G meeting to discuss the Pedestrian Signal about which the ANC complained so bitterly despite their request for its installation:
He said the test phase of the light would be completed in April and that at this time DDOT is not inclined to change the light. He noted that there were three options on the table: to leave the light as it is presently functioning; to provide a short flashing yellow for motorists on Morrison Street; or to make the signal a regular green/yellow/red light including a short 8 second advance pedestrian only phase, with the addition of speed bumps on Morrison Street.
After the humps were installed, the ANC waged a campaign of delay and even removal. Recall, also, that Mayor Fenty has a policy of installing speed humps wherever a block wanted them. In this situation, the ANC made a choice which necessitated the installation of speed humps (and why is the city giving ANC transportation planning choices?)
So why bring this up?
It seems as if a speed hump, a very large and pointy one, has been installed on Chevy Chase Parkway, right around the corner from the residence of outspoken ANC Commissioner and speed hump opponent David Engle. This hump was installed despite:
-the absence of any discussion at any ANC meeting about traffic calming for this location despite the inclusion of speed humps on the agenda for virtually every meeting over the past 18 months;
-any announcement from DDOT or the ANC to the community about its installation;
-any mention of a request on the Community listserv, nothing.
The reason for this post? There is also no signage warning motorists of its existence. It begs the question, was this speed hump installed by DDOT, or by some of the residents who felt like they wanted to by-pass the process and the scrutiny of an ANC that has been steadfast against road safety within Chevy Chase, DC?
So be forewarned, there is a speed hump on Chevy Chase Parkway between McKinley Street and Patterson Street, NW.
(For an additional bit of irony on this matter, since the Morrison Street pedestrian signal was re-programmed to a traditional signal, DDOT has installed HAWK signals and other innovations in Northwest DC. Maybe it is time to reconsider re-programming the Morrison Street light back to something more pedestrian-friendly, as originally requested by the ANC?)
He said the test phase of the light would be completed in April and that at this time DDOT is not inclined to change the light. He noted that there were three options on the table: to leave the light as it is presently functioning; to provide a short flashing yellow for motorists on Morrison Street; or to make the signal a regular green/yellow/red light including a short 8 second advance pedestrian only phase, with the addition of speed bumps on Morrison Street.
After the humps were installed, the ANC waged a campaign of delay and even removal. Recall, also, that Mayor Fenty has a policy of installing speed humps wherever a block wanted them. In this situation, the ANC made a choice which necessitated the installation of speed humps (and why is the city giving ANC transportation planning choices?)
So why bring this up?
It seems as if a speed hump, a very large and pointy one, has been installed on Chevy Chase Parkway, right around the corner from the residence of outspoken ANC Commissioner and speed hump opponent David Engle. This hump was installed despite:
-the absence of any discussion at any ANC meeting about traffic calming for this location despite the inclusion of speed humps on the agenda for virtually every meeting over the past 18 months;
-any announcement from DDOT or the ANC to the community about its installation;
-any mention of a request on the Community listserv, nothing.
The reason for this post? There is also no signage warning motorists of its existence. It begs the question, was this speed hump installed by DDOT, or by some of the residents who felt like they wanted to by-pass the process and the scrutiny of an ANC that has been steadfast against road safety within Chevy Chase, DC?
So be forewarned, there is a speed hump on Chevy Chase Parkway between McKinley Street and Patterson Street, NW.
(For an additional bit of irony on this matter, since the Morrison Street pedestrian signal was re-programmed to a traditional signal, DDOT has installed HAWK signals and other innovations in Northwest DC. Maybe it is time to reconsider re-programming the Morrison Street light back to something more pedestrian-friendly, as originally requested by the ANC?)
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Aggressive Fenty Canvassers?
A report on the Chevy Chase Listserv suggests that some Fenty re-election workers may be too aggressive:
Over the course of a month I have had visits from 3 sets of Fenty workers (I don't think I can call them volunteers because I believe they are paid for their work.) Each time I point to the "Gray" sign in my yard and tell them that I am voting for Gray. Each time they challenge my statement with heated campaign rhetoric. They want to know why I am voting for Gray and on two previous occasions I have told them why. Today they were much more aggressive both in word and physical stance. One fellow had opened my screen door and stood directly in front of me while the second fellow continued with his aggressive questioning.
I told them I was voting for Gray and that I had already explained to the two other sets of Fenty workers why I am not voting for Fenty and I did not want to got through it again. "I do not have to explain my vote to you," I said, "and now get off my porch." The one fellow said okay but just tell me one reason. To which I replied, "If you do not get off my porch I will report you for harassment." They wanted to know my name and I said you know my name because it's on your list (on their clipboard). They finally left but grudgingly.
I believe this is harassment and a bullying form of intimidation
Has anyone else had this kind of experience with campaign workers this season?
Over the course of a month I have had visits from 3 sets of Fenty workers (I don't think I can call them volunteers because I believe they are paid for their work.) Each time I point to the "Gray" sign in my yard and tell them that I am voting for Gray. Each time they challenge my statement with heated campaign rhetoric. They want to know why I am voting for Gray and on two previous occasions I have told them why. Today they were much more aggressive both in word and physical stance. One fellow had opened my screen door and stood directly in front of me while the second fellow continued with his aggressive questioning.
I told them I was voting for Gray and that I had already explained to the two other sets of Fenty workers why I am not voting for Fenty and I did not want to got through it again. "I do not have to explain my vote to you," I said, "and now get off my porch." The one fellow said okay but just tell me one reason. To which I replied, "If you do not get off my porch I will report you for harassment." They wanted to know my name and I said you know my name because it's on your list (on their clipboard). They finally left but grudgingly.
I believe this is harassment and a bullying form of intimidation
Has anyone else had this kind of experience with campaign workers this season?
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Future of Politics and Prose Uncertain
The Washington Post reports that the owners of the fabled NW icon Politics and Prose are exploring options regarding the sale of their store.
This could have a huge impact on the greater Chevy Chase community.
This could have a huge impact on the greater Chevy Chase community.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Chevy Chase ANC About Face?
According to the Northwest Current, the Chevy Chase ANC (3/4 G) has approved a request from the residents of the 5100 block of Chevy Chase Parkway for speed humps. The Katie Pierce article suggests that DDOT recommended 3 humps for the block, but that the Commission decided to lend its expertise to the traffic planning realm by suggesting fewer humps than DDOT recommended.
This is not uncommon for this ANC after Military Road and Morrison Street.
The question presents, what is different about the request from Chevy Chase Parkway residents, that the ANC supported a safer street, but not for Morrison Street, which shares the characteristic of being on the block feeding Connecticut Avenue adjacent to a busier street (McKinley for Morrison, Fessenden and Nebraska for Chevy Chase Parkway)? Both sets of residents claimed speeding cars, not traffic volumes as the reason for the traffic calming measure. Both sets of residents relied on DDOT policy, which favors the residents in all cases related to speed humps. Has this ANC softened on the issue?
This is not uncommon for this ANC after Military Road and Morrison Street.
The question presents, what is different about the request from Chevy Chase Parkway residents, that the ANC supported a safer street, but not for Morrison Street, which shares the characteristic of being on the block feeding Connecticut Avenue adjacent to a busier street (McKinley for Morrison, Fessenden and Nebraska for Chevy Chase Parkway)? Both sets of residents claimed speeding cars, not traffic volumes as the reason for the traffic calming measure. Both sets of residents relied on DDOT policy, which favors the residents in all cases related to speed humps. Has this ANC softened on the issue?
Monday, March 29, 2010
A Safer Connecticut Avenue
From the Cleveland Park Yahoo Group:
Connecticut Avenue Pedestrian Action (CAPA) is comprised of residents from Woodley Park and Cleveland Park to Forest Hills and Chevy Chase. We need everyone in the community to participate on two fronts. First, we would like residents, visitors, employees and employers to fill out a simple survey and interactive map on our website . Second, we are recruiting volunteers from up and down the corridor to help with the audit process. This will require training at a short session in late April and then a few hours of time during the study period in May. If you have interest in pedestrian safety, community activism and solidarity with the other communities along Connecticut Avenue, this is a great opportunity for you.
Connecticut Avenue Pedestrian Action (CAPA) is comprised of residents from Woodley Park and Cleveland Park to Forest Hills and Chevy Chase. We need everyone in the community to participate on two fronts. First, we would like residents, visitors, employees and employers to fill out a simple survey and interactive map on our website . Second, we are recruiting volunteers from up and down the corridor to help with the audit process. This will require training at a short session in late April and then a few hours of time during the study period in May. If you have interest in pedestrian safety, community activism and solidarity with the other communities along Connecticut Avenue, this is a great opportunity for you.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Smart Growth Forum at Chevy Chase
At the upcoming Chevy Chase Citizens Association meeting on Tuesday, September 22nd, Cheryl Cort, Policy Director at the Coalition for Smarter Growth, will generally discuss approaches for effectively managing growth and development in metropolitan areas to protect the environment and make existing communities better places to live and work. In this context, Ms. Cort will also emphasize lessons learned from development and transportation decisions in Washington, D.C., and the surrounding area, and describe plans that affect the future of our region. In addition, Tom Hier, Chair of the Steering Committee at Ward 3 Vision, will discuss grass-roots efforts related to managing growth and development in Ward 3, particularly along the Wisconsin Avenue corridor.
Please join the Chevy Chase Citizen's Association for the meeting on Tuesday September 22, at 7:30 pm, at the Chevy Chase Community Center (5601 Connecticut Avenue). Come earlier for light refreshments and an opportunity to socialize with the Association's officers and other neighbors, starting at 7:00 pm.
Please join the Chevy Chase Citizen's Association for the meeting on Tuesday September 22, at 7:30 pm, at the Chevy Chase Community Center (5601 Connecticut Avenue). Come earlier for light refreshments and an opportunity to socialize with the Association's officers and other neighbors, starting at 7:00 pm.
City Paper Updates "Humpifiction"
The City Paper has updated the previously covered Chevy Chase speed hump issue by noting:
the ANC requested the speed humps be removed pending the collection of data; it also wants an oversight hearing on the entire process.
The NW Current goes a bit further:
The commission also chastised the agency for not waiting to construct the humps until after the neighborhood commission could weigh in on them.
“What role, if any, does the ANC play in this?” asked neighborhood commissioner Jim McCarthy.
At Monday’s sparsely attended meeting, the commissioners also questioned why the city installed such large speed humps on Morrison Street. “These are the most punitive speed humps that I’ve ever seen, except on Newark Street,” said neighborhood commissioner Peggy Sewell. “Speeding is one thing; trying to scare drivers off their street is totally unacceptable.”
Didn't DDOT Spokesperson John Lisle already answer Commissioner McCarthy's question?
In the past, the agency would require a traffic study be completed for every request. Now, residents simply have to get the majority of their neighbors to sign a petition.
The city's guidelines are clear. What seems murky is why, in July, the ANC didn't do what it said it would do in their June meeting, and why it seems to perpetuate this story rather than helping the others in the community who wish to have speed humps for public safety obtain them.
the ANC requested the speed humps be removed pending the collection of data; it also wants an oversight hearing on the entire process.
The NW Current goes a bit further:
The commission also chastised the agency for not waiting to construct the humps until after the neighborhood commission could weigh in on them.
“What role, if any, does the ANC play in this?” asked neighborhood commissioner Jim McCarthy.
At Monday’s sparsely attended meeting, the commissioners also questioned why the city installed such large speed humps on Morrison Street. “These are the most punitive speed humps that I’ve ever seen, except on Newark Street,” said neighborhood commissioner Peggy Sewell. “Speeding is one thing; trying to scare drivers off their street is totally unacceptable.”
Didn't DDOT Spokesperson John Lisle already answer Commissioner McCarthy's question?
In the past, the agency would require a traffic study be completed for every request. Now, residents simply have to get the majority of their neighbors to sign a petition.
The city's guidelines are clear. What seems murky is why, in July, the ANC didn't do what it said it would do in their June meeting, and why it seems to perpetuate this story rather than helping the others in the community who wish to have speed humps for public safety obtain them.
Friday, August 14, 2009
ANC 3G seems confused
The issue of traffic calming seems to have reared its head again in the Ward. Earlier this spring, there was consternation when speed humps were installed on Newark Street in Cleveland Park without ANC or community discussion.
In Palisades the conversation has been ongoing regarding calming efforts in the area to the west of MacArthur Boulevard. However, in Chevy Chase, there is a repeat of erroneous information being passed as fact on the community listserv.
The issue is once again centered around Morrison Street where DDOT installed a pedestrian signal and converted it in August, 2008 to a traditional three-color light. The residents of the block must have believed that speeding was an issue and petitioned DDOT for traffic calming to reduce speeds.
In a recent Chevy Chase Listserv post, ANC 3/4G Chair Gary Thompson wrote:
The ANC voted (unanimously) to defer consideration of any such speed hump pending review of all the inter-connected traffic issues on the first blocks E & W of Conn. Ave. in the main shopping district.
But Thompson didn't mention the ANC's decision to take a vote on July 13th, and he didn't mention the ANC's failure to carry out its own decision.
At the June meeting, the ANC said it would collect petitions from all blocks and vote on them in July; According to the minutes
The Commission voted 6-0-1 (Cook abstaining) to defer consideration of the specific application for the 3700 block of Morrison St. until the meeting of July 13, and that for the next 30 days, other blocks off of the Conn. Shopping area should be informed of and invited to submit applications for speed humps (should they have 75% household support), and then when all such applications are in hand, consider them as a group. At the Commission meeting of July 13, the Commission will consider any applications received by that date and vote on the requests. The Chair made it clear that this is not a deadline and that any block could apply for humps after that date, but that the Commission believed that taking up a broader set of applications for all blocks in the Chevy Chase business area would afford a broader perspective and allow for balance.
Instead, the ANC took no vote. There was no record of opposition at the meetings or on the Chevy Chase listserv, and the agency requirement for 30 days had passed. After that point, the opportunity for ANC input with "great weight" had passed. DDOT had seemed to fulfill its obligation.
The ANC did not follow through with what it had stated it would do in June. Instead, it took a different tack once it realized that only an additional block of Morrison and the same block of McKinley submitted petitions (note: McKinley is the "collector" street for the Chevy Chase DC community and is not eligible for physical calming measures that "residential" streets can obtain).
So who is at fault here - the residents of Morrison Street who used standard city process to address a problem on their street? Or the ANC, which failed to act within the prescribed window from city agencies? Even if the ANC had chosen to oppose the traffic calming measures, DDOT would still have been able to install them if they were warranted as noted in this WTOP article,
DDOT spokesperson John Lisle says the process "has been streamlined."
In the past, the agency would require a traffic study be completed for every request. Now, residents simply have to get the majority of their neighbors to sign a petition.
Lisle says the reason for the change is to promote pedestrian safety.
"Safety for pedestrians, residents, workers and visitors is always a top priority. The District has long supported speed bumps in neighborhoods as a means to provide traffic calming. With the streamlined process we are now able to fill requests more efficiently."
Perhaps the ANC ought to have a better handle on how the city functions rather than inciting the public to clog city officials email boxes with misguided complaints.
In Palisades the conversation has been ongoing regarding calming efforts in the area to the west of MacArthur Boulevard. However, in Chevy Chase, there is a repeat of erroneous information being passed as fact on the community listserv.
The issue is once again centered around Morrison Street where DDOT installed a pedestrian signal and converted it in August, 2008 to a traditional three-color light. The residents of the block must have believed that speeding was an issue and petitioned DDOT for traffic calming to reduce speeds.
In a recent Chevy Chase Listserv post, ANC 3/4G Chair Gary Thompson wrote:
The ANC voted (unanimously) to defer consideration of any such speed hump pending review of all the inter-connected traffic issues on the first blocks E & W of Conn. Ave. in the main shopping district.
But Thompson didn't mention the ANC's decision to take a vote on July 13th, and he didn't mention the ANC's failure to carry out its own decision.
At the June meeting, the ANC said it would collect petitions from all blocks and vote on them in July; According to the minutes
The Commission voted 6-0-1 (Cook abstaining) to defer consideration of the specific application for the 3700 block of Morrison St. until the meeting of July 13, and that for the next 30 days, other blocks off of the Conn. Shopping area should be informed of and invited to submit applications for speed humps (should they have 75% household support), and then when all such applications are in hand, consider them as a group. At the Commission meeting of July 13, the Commission will consider any applications received by that date and vote on the requests. The Chair made it clear that this is not a deadline and that any block could apply for humps after that date, but that the Commission believed that taking up a broader set of applications for all blocks in the Chevy Chase business area would afford a broader perspective and allow for balance.
Instead, the ANC took no vote. There was no record of opposition at the meetings or on the Chevy Chase listserv, and the agency requirement for 30 days had passed. After that point, the opportunity for ANC input with "great weight" had passed. DDOT had seemed to fulfill its obligation.
The ANC did not follow through with what it had stated it would do in June. Instead, it took a different tack once it realized that only an additional block of Morrison and the same block of McKinley submitted petitions (note: McKinley is the "collector" street for the Chevy Chase DC community and is not eligible for physical calming measures that "residential" streets can obtain).
So who is at fault here - the residents of Morrison Street who used standard city process to address a problem on their street? Or the ANC, which failed to act within the prescribed window from city agencies? Even if the ANC had chosen to oppose the traffic calming measures, DDOT would still have been able to install them if they were warranted as noted in this WTOP article,
DDOT spokesperson John Lisle says the process "has been streamlined."
In the past, the agency would require a traffic study be completed for every request. Now, residents simply have to get the majority of their neighbors to sign a petition.
Lisle says the reason for the change is to promote pedestrian safety.
"Safety for pedestrians, residents, workers and visitors is always a top priority. The District has long supported speed bumps in neighborhoods as a means to provide traffic calming. With the streamlined process we are now able to fill requests more efficiently."
Perhaps the ANC ought to have a better handle on how the city functions rather than inciting the public to clog city officials email boxes with misguided complaints.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Homicide in Chevy Chase
From Councilmember Cheh:
This is to inform residents that there has been a double homicide at
5320 Belt Road. The police are on the scene and are investigating.
At this point, no information about the perpetrator(s) has been
released to the public. I am in contact with Commander Klein and will
continue to monitor the situation.
This is to inform residents that there has been a double homicide at
5320 Belt Road. The police are on the scene and are investigating.
At this point, no information about the perpetrator(s) has been
released to the public. I am in contact with Commander Klein and will
continue to monitor the situation.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Triangle Lot Redux
The fate of the triangle lot in Chevy Chase, DC is still up in the air. As previously
noted a local developer bought the lot with the intention of building a house within the back portions of a number of other houses in the community. The BZA rejected the application leaving its use in the air. Now however, the daughter of the developer is seeking clients for her new dog-walking business, proposing to use the lot as a dog run. The Washington Post covered the story.
noted a local developer bought the lot with the intention of building a house within the back portions of a number of other houses in the community. The BZA rejected the application leaving its use in the air. Now however, the daughter of the developer is seeking clients for her new dog-walking business, proposing to use the lot as a dog run. The Washington Post covered the story.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Fox 5 on the Chevy Chase Historic District
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)