|
|
||
|
Minority Report on Holladay Corporation's Zoning Change Application for a Property at the Corner of Albemarle St, NW and Nebraska Ave, NW By a majority of 3-2, ANC 3E resolved to oppose the application for Zoning variance and a PUD for the property in question. Before this vote, in light of the extensive research and deliberations in this matter, the ANC agreed that the majority would craft the wording of the passed resolution and that the minority could attach its opinion. The minority would have offered a resolution "not to object to" the application. This is certainly less than unqualified support The developer's plans require, in our opinion, some modification beyond that already made by the developer. The developer has already modified its proposal in response to density, environmental and aesthetic concerns expressed by TNA, including a reduction in the number of units from 26 to 14 and doubling the on-site per unit parking. Other suggestions made by TNA should still be on the table, including improved bio-remediation (tree replacement), additional property amenities, possible height reductions and even further reductions in the number of units. It is the minority's opinion that the developer's plans are reasonable for the property and the location (its proximity to a metro facility, a busy commercial strip as well as to a residential community). TNA's principal objection is to the notion of a zoning variance within a single-family neighborhood. In our opinion, the property is on the periphery of an area zoned R1, separated from the core contiguous neighborhood by two substantial streets (Albemarle and Nebraska) rather than "within" the neighborhood. Finally, the minority feels it is not qualified to comment on the issue of precedent in the zoning process. However, it is not clear to us that this case will either destroy the "single family residence" nature of this part of Tenleytown or condemn other residential neighborhoods to the vagaries of "spot zoning". Our objective is to encourage further dialogue between the two parties prior to the hearing by the Zoning Commission. In fact, we would recommend professional mediation in this case. We urge the Zoning Commission to require the two parties to work towards an improved plan. Jill
Diskan Chris McNamara |
