Minutes – Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A

November 1, 2016 Regular Public Meeting

Approved January 3, 2017

 

 

The meeting was held at the Jewish Primary Day School, 6045 16th Street N.W.  Commissioner Gale Black, Chair (and ANC 4A08) called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM.  Also present were Commissioners 4A01 Acqunetta Anderson, 4A03 Stephen Whatley, 4A04 Patience Singleton, 4A06 Karrye Braxton, and 4A07 Dave Wilson.  Commissioner 4A02 Dwayne Toliver was absent.  A quorum was present for all votes.

 

1)         Approval of the Agenda

 

Commissioner Anderson moved to amend the agenda by removing the Walter Reed Army Medical Center Preservation Resolution.  There was no objection.  Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the agenda as amended.  Commissioner Braxton seconded the motion. The motion was approved, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

2)         Presentation & Resolution:  1907 Quincy St NW, Public Space Occupancy Permit Application for Curb Cut

 

Commissioner Black moved that the Commission adopt a resolution supporting an application for a public space occupancy permit to construct a curb cut in order to relocate a driveway at 1907 Quincy Street N.W.  Commissioner Whatley seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted unanimously, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

The adopted resolution:

 

RESOLVED:

 

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A (the Commission) supports the application of Mr. Eric Mann, 1907 Quincy Street N.W. (the Applicant,) for a public space occupancy permit to construct a curb cut at the above-specified address.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED:

 

Consistent with DC Code §1-309, only actions of the full Commission voting in a properly noticed public meeting have standing and carry great weight.  The actions, positions and opinions of individual commissioners, insofar as they may be contradictory to or otherwise inconsistent with the expressed position of the full Commission in a properly adopted resolution or letter, have no standing and cannot be considered as in any way associated with the Commission.

 

 

 

 

3)         Resolution:  Liquor License Application - Swampoodle, 5501 14th Street NW, Class C Tavern License

 

Commissioner Whatley moved that moved that the Commission adopt a resolution supporting the application of Swampoodle, 5501 14th Street N.W. to renew its Class C Tavern liquor license.  Commissioner Black seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted, 5 yes, 0 no, 1 abstain.

 

The adopted resolution:

 

RESOLVED:

 

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A (the Commission) supports the application of Swampoodle, 5501 14th Street N.W., ABRA-095920 (the Applicant) for renewal of its Class C Tavern Liquor License.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED: 

 

That Commissioner Dave Wilson, 4A07, is hereby authorized to serve as the Commission’s representative.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED:

 

That, in the event the designated representative Commissioner cannot carry out his representative duties for any reason, the Commission authorizes the Chairperson to designate another Commissioner to represent the Commission in all matter relating to this resolution.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED:

 

Consistent with DC Code §1-309, only actions of the full Commission voting in a properly noticed public meeting have standing and carry great weight.  The actions, positions and opinions of individual commissioners, insofar as they may be contradictory to or otherwise inconsistent with the expressed position of the full Commission in a properly adopted resolution or letter, have no standing and cannot be considered as in any way associated with the Commission.

 

4)         Resolution:  Proposed Walter Reed Conceptual Subdivision Plan

 

Following a presentation from Ms. Caroline Kenney, Commissioner Whatley moved that the Commission adopt a resolution supporting the proposed Walter Reed Army Medical Center Historic District Conceptual Subdivision Plan.  Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. 

 

Commissioner Whatley moved that he be appointed to represent the Commission regarding the resolution.  Commissioner Braxton seconded the motion. 

 

Commissioner Anderson suggested that the words “. . . for this resolution only” be added to the paragraph appointing Commissioner Whatley.  Commissioner Whatley accepted the suggested change.  The motion was adopted without objection.

 

The main motion was adopted by roll call vote, 4 yes, 2 no.

 

The roll call vote:

 

YES                                                                NO                                                      ABSTAIN

 

4A01   Anderson                                          4A07   Wilson

4A03   Whatley                                             4A08   Black

4A04   Singleton

4A06   Braxton

 

The adopted resolution:

 

WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable District laws, each Advisory Neighborhood Commission ("Commission") may advise the Council of the District of Columbia, the Mayor and each executive agency, and all independent agencies, boards and commissions of the government of the District of Columbia with respect to all proposed matters of District government policy,  including, but not limited  to, decisions regarding planning, streets, recreation, social services programs, education, health, safety, budget,  and sanitation which  affect that Commission  area [D.C. Official  Code  §§ 1-309.lO(a)];

WHEREAS, proposed District government actions include actions of the Council of the District of Columbia, the executive branch, or independent agencies, boards, and commissions.  In addition to  those notices required in D.C. Official Code §§ 1-309.lO(a), each agency board and commission shall, before the award of any grant funds to a citizen organization  or Committee, before the transmission  to   the Council of a proposed revenue bond  issuance, or before the formulation  of any final policy  decision  or guideline with respect to grant applications, comprehensive plans, requested or proposed zoning changes, variances, public improvements,  licenses, or permits affecting  said Commission  area, the District budget and city goals and priorities, proposed changes in District  government  service delivery, and the opening of any proposed facility systems, provide to each affected Commission notice of the proposed  action as required by D.C. Official  Code §§  1-309.IO(b);

 

WHEREAS, the issues and concerns raised in the recommendations of the Commission shall be given great weight during the deliberations by the government entity, and great weight requires acknowledgement of the Commission as the source of the recommendations and explicit reference to each of the Commission’s issues and concerns [D.C.  Official Code §§ l-309.10(c)(3)(A)];

 

WHEREAS, the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions ("ANCs") are the bodies of government with the closest ties to the people  and they are expected to advise the city on issues, including fees,   taxes, zoning, social service programs, health, emergency preparedness, economic development, transportation  and infrastructure  issues;

 

WHEREAS, Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A (the Commission) takes note of the following:

 

·         The Walter Reed development team, The Parks at Walter Reed LLC (TPWR), consisting of Hines-Urban Atlantic-Trident, requests ANC 4A’s support of their Conceptual Subdivision Plan submission to HPRB. The Conceptual Subdivision Plan follows the site zoning that was approved in July 2015, which ANC 4A previously reviewed, commented and voted on.

 

·         In order to apply for building permits, the site must be subdivided into individual record lots that will have their own tax parcel designations and a review by the Zoning Administrator within DCRA. The Zoning Administrator will confirm that each record lot meets the requirements of Zoning.

 

·         Typically, subdivision plans are not brought before ANCs because they are simply technical plats that follow zoning. However, because Walter Reed is a Historic District, the Conceptual Subdivision Plan must be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB). The HPRB review triggered the request for ANC review.

 

·         In order to facilitate the building review process for the earliest planned users of the Walter Reed site – DCI School in particular – TPWR is requesting that HPRB review the Conceptual Subdivision Plan during its November hearing, which is scheduled for 11/17/16.

 

·         To provide further specifics, the Conceptual Subdivision Plan follows the established zone parcels (“Land Bay”) boundary lines established in the Walter Reed Zone (Zoning Order 14-22) with the minor exceptions listed below. These exceptions do not change the zoning requirements for development within the project, nor do they approve specific new developments. They simply allow record lots to be created.

 

·         Some zoning Land Bays have been combined into a single future record lot to meet DC Zoning Regulation Section 303.1 which states “Except for alley lots, all new record lots shall have at least one (1) street lot line on a public street or a public access easement approved by the District Department of Transportation.” As some Land Bays will not have public street access  until new streets are built within the project, the Master Developer combined the following:

o   Land Bay J.6 (Building 14) and Land Bay J.7 (open space)

o   Land Bay J.1 (Great Lawn) + J.8 (Building 15, 16) + J.9 (Building 82)

o   Land Bay K.1 (Future site of Building V/U) + K.2 (Building 90)

o   Land Bay K.4 (open space) + K.3 (Buildings 8 & 9)

o   Land Bay G.2 (open space) + G.3 (Building 12) + G.6 (open space)

o   Land Bay G.1 (Building 6) + G.5 (Building 7) + G.4 (Future site of Building S, R and Q)

o   Land Bay E (Bldg. 2/ Future site of Town Center) + Land Bay F

 

·         In the case of zoning Land Bays along Aspen Street, the Land Bay boundary lines do not extend to the property line [the Office of Planning did this in order to accommodate the future Aspen Street widening]. For these Land Bays, the Master Developer extended the future record lot boundary line to the property line in order to meet the public street/access easement requirement discussed above.

 

·         The diagram shows a future record lot for the future public streets (e.g., Main Drive, Dahlia Street, etc.). The Master Developer believes this will be required to obtain the building permits needed to construct the roads to DDOT standards.

 

RESOLVED:

 

FURTHER RESOLVED: 

That Commissioner Stephen A. Whatley is hereby authorized to serve as the Commission’s representative for this resolution only.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED:

That, in the event the designated representative Commissioners cannot carry out his representative duties for any reason, the Commission authorizes the Chairperson to designate another Commissioner to represent the Commission in all matter relating to this resolution.

 

FURTHER RESOLVED:

Consistent with DC Code §1-309, only actions of the full Commission voting in a properly noticed public meeting have standing and carry great weight.  The actions, positions and opinions of individual commissioners, insofar as they may be contradictory to or otherwise inconsistent with the expressed position of the full Commission in a properly adopted resolution or letter, have no standing and cannot be considered as in any way associated with the Commission.

 

5)         Resolution:  Recommendations Regarding DC Public Schools Application to BZA for Special Exception to construct rooftop penthouse at Shepherd Elementary School,7800 14th Street NW

 

Commissioner Anderson moved that consideration of this application be postponed to the December 6, 2016 Commission meeting.  Commissioner Whatley seconded the motion.  Following discussion, the motion was withdrawn without objection.

 

Commissioner Whatley moved that this item be removed from the agenda.  Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

6)         Resolution:  Supporting Veterans Court  

 

Commissioner Black moved that the Commission adopt a resolution supporting the establishment of a Veterans Treatment Court program in the District of Columbia.  Commissioner Whatley seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

The adopted resolution:

 

Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A (the Commission) takes note of the following:

 

          A constituent residing in the Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4B area requested that Advisory Neighborhood Commission 4A adopt a resolution supporting the Veterans’ Court Treatment Program, since ANC 4B has done so.

 

          A Veterans' Treatment Court is a "special court" which is charged with trying cases of minor offenses which involve veterans of the United States Armed Forces, particularly those diagnosed with service-related illnesses. The first Veterans' Treatment Court was established in 2008 in Buffalo, New York, and has been used as a model for establishments of other veterans' treatment courts in other parts of the United States.

 

          In less than two years, 19 more Veteran Treatment Courts appeared in different jurisdictions, usually at the discretion of individual judges. By the end of 2012, there were 129. As of 2014, there were 197 in operation across the U.S. serving more than 10,000 veterans who might otherwise be incarcerated.

 

          A Washington Post report released in 2014 found that more than half of the 2.6 million Americans dispatched to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from physical or mental health problems linked to their service. Recent data compiled by the RAND organization estimates that 1 in 6 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are alcohol and/or drug addicted; and that 1 in 5 suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or significant mental anguish.

 

          A CBS News investigation in 2014 found that over the past 11 years, the number of patients treated for prescription drug abuse by the Veterans Administration increased 29 percent, but narcotics prescriptions increased 259 percent.

 

          The Veterans Treatment Court model requires regular court appearances (a bi-weekly minimum in the early phases of the program), as well as mandatory attendance at treatment sessions and frequent and random testing for substance use (drugs and/or alcohol).  Veterans respond favorably to this structured environment given their past experiences in the Armed Forces.  However, a few will struggle and it is exactly those veterans who need a Veterans Treatment Court program the most.  Without this structure, these veterans will reoffend and remain in the criminal justice system.  The Veterans Treatment Court is able to ensure they meet their obligations to themselves, the court, and their community.

 

          Veterans Treatment Courts allow jurisdictions to serve a large segment of the justice-involved veteran population as opposed to business as usual – having all veterans appear before random judges who may or may not have an understanding of their unique problems. 

 

          Because a Veterans Treatment Court judge handles numerous veterans' cases and is supported by a strong, interdisciplinary team, he or she is in a much better position to exercise discretion and effectively respond than a judge who only occasionally hears a case involving a veteran defendant. 

 

          A Veterans Treatment Court judge better understands the issues that a veteran may be struggling with, such as substance addiction, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, and military sexual trauma. 

 

          A Veterans Treatment Court judge is also more familiar with the Veterans Health Administration, Veterans Benefit Administration, State Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Service Organizations, and volunteer Veteran Mentors and how they all can assist veteran defendants.

 

          Veterans Treatment Courts act as a “one-stop shop,” linking veterans with the programs, benefits and services they have earned.  For example, the Veterans Health Administration's Veterans Justice Outreach Specialist, or VJO, is present during the court docket with a laptop computer able to access confidential medical records, make treatment appointments, and communicate this information to the court.

 

          The Veterans Benefit Administration may provide a representative to ensure that veterans receive disability compensation, and education and training benefits. 

 

          Veterans Service Organizations and State Departments of Veterans Affairs assist veterans with additional local and state resources, while volunteer Veteran Mentors provide morale and motivational support.  These team members are not employed by the criminal justice system and normally would not be present at the courthouse.  Consolidating justice-involved veterans onto a single docket permits these individuals to actively support those in need of their help.

 

          The goal of Veterans Treatment Court is to allow the veteran to be rehabilitated to the law-abiding citizen they were before their experience in the military and combat. There are no guaranteed incentives for any participant who satisfactorily completes the program. Typical incentives do include taking years off of probation and moving from formal to summarized probation. At the completion, fees can be waived, and felonies can be commuted, and in some states, judges may expunge charges completely.

 

 

 

 

RESOLVED:

 

Ø  That the Commission strongly supports the concept, operation and goals of Veterans Treatment Courts as described above.

 

Ø  That the Commission strongly recommends to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia that it establish a Veterans Treatment Court as described above to address justice-system-involved veterans and resolve their cases without incarceration when possible.

 

Ø  That the Commission strongly recommends to the relevant agencies of the District of Columbia government, including the City Council, the Mayor, the Mayor’s Office of Veteran Affairs, and the Attorney General that they do everything possible to support the establishment of Veterans Treatment Courts in the District of Columbia.

 

7)         Resolution:  Animals Across ANC 4A

 

Commissioner Whatley moved that consideration of this resolution be postponed to the December 6, 2016 Commission meeting or whenever the Commission meets again.  Commissioner Black seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

8)         Resolution:  Lead in Water

 

Commissioner Anderson moved that consideration of this resolution be postponed to the December 6, 2016 Commission meeting or whenever the Commission meets again.  Commissioner Whatley seconded the motion.  The motion was adopted, 6 yes, 0 no.

 

Community Concerns

 

1.    Ms. Whatley said that now that the Walter Reed site has been transferred to the District of Columbia, can the problem of animal control be addressed?  In response, Commissioner Whatley noted that a task force under the Walter Reed Community Advisory Committee is being formed to address the animal control problem.

 

2.    Ms. Dierdre [last name inaudible] said there needs to be a more specific definition of concepts of wildlife and rodents before trying to develop legislation on animal control issues.

 

3.   Ms. Darcy Jackson, 5900 block, 13th Place NW, expressed concern about parking signs placed on her block that convert the street to one-way from 7-9 am and 3-5 pm due to the Lamb Public Charter School.   There has been no consultation with the residents.  Commissioner Braxton asked that the residents email her with details so that she could follow up with the single-member district commissioner for that area.

 

4.   David Gillerts, 4A02, expressed concern about a revised traffic study for the Jamal’s Gateway DC project and which does not seem to have been properly considered by the Zoning Commission.

 

Presentations and Reports

 

1)         Mr. Philipp McCauley, Executive Office of the Mayor, gave a report on current issues and projects of concern to the Mayor’s office.

 

2)         Ms. Melanie Mason, D.C. Water, presented information on water quality, water treatment and lead in water.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 PM.