Res 06-17

ANC 3F RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AT 2950 TILDEN STREET, NW

Zoning Commission Case 05-26

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 3F
North Cleveland Park, Forest Hills & Tenleytown
4401-A Connecticut Avenue, N.W., #244
Washington, D.C. 20008-2322

WHEREAS, Tilden 800, LLC, a subsidiary of Clark Realty Capital, LLC, has filed an application for a planned unit development and zoning map amendment from R-2 to R-5-C at 2950 Tilden St. NW, Lot 800 in Square 2234; and 

WHEREAS, the property has a total area of 34,686 square feet, which would allow by right construction at existing R-2 zoning of 8 semi-detached single family homes with side and rear yards and a maximum height of 40 feet and 3 stories; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to build a six-story 49-unit multi-family building that will be 67 feet high and contain 87,000 gross square feet of floor area above grade, a significantly different and more dense project than would be possible under existing zoning; and

WHEREAS, in recommending that this project be set down for a hearing, the Office of Planning used the city-wide elements of the Comprehensive Plan rather than the objectives and policies of the Ward 3 Plan, 10 DCMR Chapter 14, even though the latter is the authoritative document that supplements, qualifies, and interprets the Comprehensive Plan’s more general objectives and policies for our ward; and

WHEREAS, the Ward 3 plan is very specific and should be the guiding document on which this project is judged (see attachment); and

WHEREAS, this project is not in a designated “housing opportunity area” and does not meet the standards set forth in the Ward 3 plan for maintaining and protecting already built low density, stable neighborhoods and does not meet the need for elderly and/or low and moderate-income housing, nor does it meet the standards set forth in the Ward plan for urban design, economic development, transportation, land use, environment, historic and transportation sections; and

WHEREAS, although the Generalized Land Use Map shows this property as high density residential, we know of no reason why it should be treated differently from its existing zoning or why its existing zoning might be improper, since the existing zoning conforms to the zoning of properties adjacent to it and across the street; and

WHEREAS, at several community meetings and at an ANC meeting on May 8, 2006, ANC 3F heard from the Applicant and nearby residents, who strongly objected to the project; and

WHEREAS, at a duly-noticed public meeting on May 15, 2006, ANC 3F voted 6-0-1, with a quorum present, to oppose this application;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT ANC 3F reaffirms its opposition to the project and finds it to be out of character with the Tilden Street neighborhood and inappropriate in this setting:

Despite the Applicant's claim on page 24 of the July 27, 2005, application that "stately, high rise buildings fill the corridor and spread east and west on Tilden and neighboring streets like Van Ness" (emphasis added); there are NO high-rise buildings on Tilden Street east of Connecticut Avenue except for the two apartment buildings on the corner of Connecticut and Tilden, both of which have Connecticut Avenue addresses. Instead, Tilden Street east of Connecticut Avenue is lined with 1-3 story single family detached and semi-detached homes and embassies, in a pattern typical of most streets in Forest Hills. Van Ness Street is two blocks away and not visible from Tilden Street. Unlike Tilden Street, it has three high rise buildings set far back from the street and no single family homes. They are heavily landscaped with large trees.

The adjacent property to the east is owned and occupied by the Kuwaiti Embassy. The east wall of the Applicant’s project would be built on the common property line with terraces overlooking the embassy. As recognized in Section 1409.7 (e) of the Ward 3 Plan, as amended, “new high-rise structures adjacent to [embassy properties along Tilden Street] would adversely impact existing residential uses in the area”. Giving persons on upper floors the opportunity to look into the embassy compound would be inappropriate.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT ANC 3F believes that approval of this application for a map amendment to R-5-C could lead to destabilization and possible rezoning of the neighborhood and could cause great harm to adjacent property owners.

For the many residents of 3883 Connecticut Avenue whose condominiums face this property, this project will diminish their enjoyment of their apartments. The building would block their views and be as little as 26 feet away.

Similarly, residents of 3901 Connecticut Avenue would be harmed because they relied on a statement that this lot would be developed with 8 duplexes when they entered into an agreement to convey easements needed to develop 3883 Connecticut Avenue. It will also block views from this historic building.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT ANC 3F advises that this application conflicts with the Ward 3 Plan in many respects and fails to provide the superior benefits or project amenities required by the PUD evaluation standards of 11 DCMR 2403.9 and Section 1406.9 (h)(5) of the Ward 3 Plan:

1. It conflicts with the Ward 3 Plan’s objectives and policies for urban design:

(a). This project is too high in relation to adjacent buildings along Tilden Street. Despite the requirement of 10 DCMR Section 1406.9 (a) to

Relate the overall height of new construction . . . to that of adjacent structures.  As a general rule, construct new buildings to a height roughly equal to the average height of existing buildings.  

This building will be higher than either of the adjacent buildings along Tilden Street. Tilden Hall, on the corner of Connecticut and Tilden, is 5 stories high (contrary to the Office of Planning’s December 27, 2005, Preliminary Hearing Report and Applicant's statement on page 2 of the March 13, 2006, Prehearing Submission), and the Kuwaiti Embassy is two stories high. The Applicant’s building would be higher, too, than the semi-detached houses across Tilden Street (see transverse and longitudinal sections in Applicant’s May 22, 2006, Request to Modify Application at A10, A11, and A12).

(b). It is larger in scale and width than adjacent buildings and those across the street, despite the objective and policy of Section 1406.9 (b) to

Relate the size and proportions of new construction to the scale of adjacent buildings. New construction should maintain the scale of existing buildings, regardless of size. Avoid new construction which in height, width, or massing violates the existing scale of the area.

(c). It would sit closer to Tilden Street than the adjacent buildings, contrary to the direction of Section 1406.9 (e) to 

Maintain the historic facade lines of streetscapes by locating front walls of new construction in the same plane as the facades of adjacent buildings.  If exceptions are made, buildings should be set back into the lot rather than closer to the street. . . . Avoid violating the existing setback pattern by placing new construction in front of or behind the historic façade line.

(d). It does not provide an adequate buffer for 3883 Connecticut Avenue, as required by Section 1406.9 (h)(2).

Parts of the rear of this tall building would be only 26 feet from 3883 Connecticut Avenue, just enough to accommodate an easement for a fire lane and a fringe of foundation plantings that may be hard to survive because the proximity of the two buildings will place the south side of 2950 Tilden in the shade most of the day.

2. The architecture does not conform to the style and materials found in the neighborhood; it may affect the setting of nearby historic properties:

In contrast to the traditional brick and stucco architecture of most buildings in the neighborhood -- including the row of 100-year old townhouses across the street and several nearby apartment buildings, some of which have been landmarked -- the architectural style of this project is modern. Although there are a few modern-style buildings in the neighborhood, they are low, set back from the street, and shrouded by trees. Residents have stated that the style and feel of this precast concrete building is out of character with their established neighborhood.

3. Although the Applicant proposes to landscape the property, the lack of open space will preclude plantings of any significant size to soften the height and mass of the building:

Landscaping will consist primarily of ornamental trees, shrubs, and moss. This is no substitute for the 30 or so mature canopy trees that once grew here. Large canopy trees cannot be planted because the underground structure for parking and a fitness center will take up the entire lot except for the fire lane, where only grass may be planted.

The size of the project leaves so little land around the building for landscaping that the Applicant’s proposed planting of canopy trees, shrubs, and ornamentals along the western edge of the driveway would be on the property of Tilden Hall, 3945 Connecticut Avenue, NOT on the Applicant’s own property. This 5 to 8-foot wide strip between two driveways would be too narrow and hostile an environment to sustain these plantings or allow them to grow to any height. ANC 3F has not seen an agreement between the Applicant and Tilden Hall allowing the Applicant to plant these trees or specifying who will maintain them or replace them if they die.

The Applicant proposes to plant hollies and shrubs in the 6-foot wide berm between the southern face of the building and the fire lane. These slow-growing low to mid-size trees will not provide much visual relief to the severe architectural design.

4. The narrowness of the driveway and limited facilities for deliveries will prevent effective and safe vehicular access:

Not only is the landscaping constrained by the use of the entire lot for the underground parking structure, vehicular access is limited by the size of the building above grade, which is pushed to the limits of the lot.

The proposed two-way driveway into the parking garage is only 16 feet wide with walls on both sides. It would be very tight for cars to pass each other. Even more difficult to negotiate would be the entrance into the garage, where the driveway narrows as it turns a blind corner.

The only loading zone planned for this sizable project is a 12 by 30-foot space that could accommodate a small truck at best. Without a separate loading and unloading area for large vehicles or a drop off and pick up area for small vehicles, this project will place an unacceptable burden on the street system. Moving vans, taxicabs and vehicles dropping off or picking up passengers, Fed Ex trucks, and emergency vehicles will have to double park on Tilden Street, thereby stopping traffic and creating havoc with this important cross-town route. Furthermore, a project of this size would be expected to draw a large number of visitors, contractors, and other service providers. The failure to provide off-street loading berths and platforms defies the general objective and policy of Section 1404.3 (e) of the Ward 3 Plan that “all off-street loading for new major commercial and residential buildings utilize private space to the greatest extent possible (i.e., to avoid an impact on public space . . .)”. There is nothing superior about vehicular access for this project.

5. The project would add to the already failing and near failing traffic levels in the area:

The Applicant’s transportation study is both inadequate and inaccurate. It was conducted for only one day, September 29^th 2004, and only during the morning and evening rush hours, when traffic flows more smoothly because Connecticut Avenue has reversible lanes and no parking. After it was conducted, changes to the turn signal and timing of the traffic light at Connecticut and Van Ness have caused conditions to worsen at the intersection of Connecticut Avenue and Tilden Street. Now, northbound traffic on Connecticut Avenue routinely backs up past Tilden Street into Cleveland Park at all times of day throughout the week and weekends and blocks the intersection of Connecticut and Tilden, preventing cars from entering or leaving Tilden Street. None of this was taken into account in the study. 

On page 24 of the July 27, 2005, application, the Applicant calls Tilden St. NW “a median-divided four lane street,” but in reality Tilden Street has Ward 3 residentially-zoned parking and is parked with cars on both sides at all times. DDOT also striped the street for bike lanes next to the parking on both sides of the street, narrowing the street to one travel lane in each direction.

This project will have an adverse effect on traffic on Tilden Street. The Applicant’s traffic study acknowledges that the Connecticut Avenue-Tilden Street intersection already is operating at a failing level of service (LOS), in particular for westbound traffic on Tilden Street:

During the AM peak hour, the westbound and northbound approaches operate at failing levels of service and the eastbound approach operates at a deficient LOS E. During the AM peak hour, the southbound approach, which is operating at a LOS B, is the only approach operating at acceptable levels of service. During the PM peak hour, the eastbound and westbound approaches operate at failing levels of service while both the northbound and southbound operate at LOS B.

(July 27, 2005, Application, Tab B at 6). Queues for westbound traffic on Tilden extend east from Connecticut Avenue past 29th Street. The presence of the median will require cars exiting the property and seeking to access Connecticut Avenue to travel east on Tilden Street NW, make a u-turn at 29^th Street and wait to join the queue, thereby creating further back-ups during peak hours. This conflicts with Section 1404.5 (a) of the Transportation objective and policy for Ward 3 to "improve levels of service at intersections to "C" or better.

6. The project would have a negative impact on views from Melvin Hazen Park:

At its southeast corner, this property abuts Melvin Hazen National Park. Views of this large, tall building would be clearly visible from the park, contrary to the Ward 3 policy for the natural environment articulated in Section 1406.5 (5) that

[d]evelopment adjacent to [stream valley] parks must be low density and shall be further restricted where advisable to protect unstable soils, eliminate runoff potential, and promote a green buffer between the built environment and these natural settings. Development of border areas must avoid any adverse effect (known or plausibly suspected) on these stream valley parks, including the water quality, flora, and fauna, and should minimize any intrusion on views from these parks

7. This proposed project fails to “provide a net gain for the ward environmentally”, as required by Section 1403.7 (b) of the Ward 3 Plan:

Growing large canopy trees similar to the ones that once grew on this lot or that grace nearby lots in the Forest Hills Tree and Slope Protection Overlay will no longer be possible because the underground levels for parking and the fitness center will extend under the entire lot except for the easement for the fire lane. The heat island effect from the large amount of impervious surface on this property will not be tempered by the small shrubs and ornamentals that will be planted.

The only amenity the Applicant is offering as a benefit to the environment is a partial green roof over the sixth floor.

8. The affordable housing being offered is insufficient:

The Applicant’s offer to provide 3 affordable housing units is de minimus. This number falls far short of any of the requirements for residential zone districts set forth in Zoning Commission Case No. 04-33 regarding inclusionary zoning. It certainly does not go far enough to meet the residential neighborhood objective of the Ward 3 Plan to “[c]onsider the provision of elderly and low/moderate-income housing, when it is a substantial portion of a project, as an important amenity in Planned Unit Developments” (10 DCMR Section 1409.4 (c)(2)) (emphasis added) or the general housing objective in Section 1402.3 (b) to “encourage a mix of populations within new or renovated multi-family structures, with up to twenty percent (20%) of the units set aside for low-and moderate-income residents.” Nor does the Applicant specify “the size, type (1, 2, and 3 bedroom), and location of the affordable units and how these units would be classified according to HUD affordability standards” as OP requested in its Preliminary Hearing Statement, page 10.

9. Other public benefits being offered are insignificant and do not benefit this neighborhood:

This project offers no amenities to the immediate neighborhood. The Applicant even fails to agree to restore the median strip after using it as a staging area when constructing 3883 Connecticut Avenue. Instead, the Applicant proposes to donate $100,000 for renovation of Peirce Mill, a property owned by the National Park Service, and $35,000 to $40,000 as an unspecified gift to Hearst Recreation Center, which is on the border of ANC 3F and ANC 3C and outside this particular neighborhood.

These donations are truly insignificant compared to the Applicant’s requested increase of 45,377 square feet over the maximum gross floor area allowed at matter of right zoning. They amount to only an average of $3 a square foot of the increase.