The newsletter describes the proposed space roughly as:
"The property covered is an L-shaped piece of property fronting on H Street NE, on the north, G Street to a mid-block alley on the south, Second Street on the west, the mid-block alley on the east, and around 40 feet of frontage on Third Street immediately south of H Street."
Here's a note from the map's creator:
In this map (adapted from an H Street Main Street Map (http://restore.dc.gov/restoredc/lib/restoredc/maps/H_St_MS_map.pdf)) I have sketched out in red the area that I THINK the article describes. NOTE: The red lines were added by me and are only a guess. If this is right, what about the 8 houses on G St and the buildings behind? Eminent domain?
Kenny G
h street corridor
h street dc
10 comments:
Based on the tax records, I believe that the red lines are overinclusive as to G St. (I live on 3rd & G.) I don't think that "Station Townhouses LLC" (and similar such entities) are reflected as the owners of any lots listed with G Street NE addresses. Nor do I believe Dreyfus purchased the Sealander commercial properties on the corner (but I could be wrong).
There's been some traffic about this proposal on the listserves, including histrionic language fromt he CHRS that it represents part of a "War on Capitol Hill", that I don't quite understand.
Dreyfus has repeatedly publicized their intention to build on the parking lot that is currently the 200 block of H Street and a building that is tall on the 2d street end but stepped down on 3d, where the bridge terminates and residentially-zoned rowhouses start, would fit with the SEC and the new condos that will tower over the Abdo lofts and could very likely improve what is currently a desolate spot.
Correction to the above: Looks like various investment partnerships based at the law firm Venable now own a number of the first few commercially-zoned rowhouses on G St NE. So presumably that land may be being consolidated with the land owned by "Station Townhouses" and the other entities.
It is hard to tell from the article exactly where the lines end. Tax records are not always correct, or updated, but I would trust them in this case because it seems unlikely that the residents would sell (nd I think we would hear about it if there were plans immanent domain moves).
CHRS seems to be generally unhappy with the Station Place development:
http://www.chrs.org/
I'm open to being convinced that this development is a bad thing for the neighborhood, but I'm not there yet based on what little I know. It's not as if a giant monolithic building was being plopped down in the middle of Cap Hill. It's a dense, mixed residential and retail project which is being built very close to a major public transportation hub (Union Station). Several other projects of a similar nature are also going in right around there (Uline, the Senate Square condos, etc), which will probably involve a grocery store and other retail as well. The end result will be a concentration of people within walking distance of their shopping needs and public transportation. From a city planning and neighborhood standpoint, I thought this would be considered a good thing. It will also provide a good base of customers for the west end of what many people hope will soon be a rejuvenated and vibrant H street corridor.
It's these kinds of stands that give CHRS the nick name of capitol hill hysterical society. H street is not in the capitol hill historical area so they should have very little say in the matter...but that will not be the case.This group has great clout with Sharon Ambrose and other city leaders.
I hadn't realized before that this was the same organization that kicked up such a fuss about preserving the shack on E Street SE by the Safeway (sorry, the "historical shotgun house.")
The article mentions the destruction of dozens of potential "historic" rowhouses on the site but the author clearly didn't actually visit the site to realize that the majority of buildings that would be replaced are 1960s era nondescript brick buildings being used as offices (i.e most of the rowhomes are already gone.) They could at least look at the damn place before blasting off such alerts.
This project seems to be in keeping with the H Street zoning overlay, which went through a long public comment process. There's nothing surprising or particularly bad about this. My concerns aren't with the density but with the building's design. Dreyfus isn't always as good about the architects as they should be.
If not for CHRS, Capitol Hill would be a freeway, and those of us beyond the Historic District would most likely be living on freeway feeder lanes (if we were here at all). CHRS was organized to avoid that fate.
I'm glad CHRS takes an interest in the residential area outside of the historic district, because hardly anyone else does, at least in an organized fashion. My impression is that CHRS resists only development that is inconsistent with the existing residential and historic character of the neighborhood. That leaves developers with a lot of options from which they can make a bundle of money (as many have already).
Besides, "that group" is made up of many of our neighbors, even those of us who live outside of of the historic district. As such, "they" deserve as much of a say in developments like this one as any other resident or neighborhood group.
The CHRS article seems to take as a premise that anything that is taller than a few storys and/or eliminates any preexisting building is "abusive" zoning. Given that the site is largely a parking lot next to a four story concrete bridge and is currently zoned for commercial use, that presupposition seems misplaced for this particular project.
And anyone living close to the West end of H Street NE already does live on a freeway feeder lane!
Post a Comment