See this Email thread passed along by Stu Davenport.
FYI, this was a response I sent to a resident Tom Bridge, after he posted comments made by Commissioner Ransom in a local list-serve. Feel free to publish.
FYI, this was a response I sent to a resident Tom Bridge, after he posted comments made by Commissioner Ransom in a local list-serve. Feel free to publish.
-Stuart
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: stuart davenport
To: tom @ welovedc.com
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 10:37:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Brookland] Fwd: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010
Tom-
If you have any questions please let me know.
Gigi knows that the ANC missed the July 12th deadline to file a protest, and they therefore have no standing in the BBC application. She was informed of this ABRA requirement in early June/July before the deadline, and then was reminded by ABRA the day of the ANC vote.
The below information supplied by Gigi is incorrect. The application with the Office of Zoning was not for a change of our existing use, but for a map amendment to ``correct the non-conforming status`` of the building. This does not affect the legality of the cafe as it operates now - it affects how the cafe can be treated in the future. It ensures that no-one can take away its commercial status, and it allows the cafe to operate without requirement of special exceptions (BZA, etc.).
The BBC had a certificate of occupancy for 8 seats in 2006, for a grocery/deli. By definition (in 2006), a deli was a place with prepared food, and a restaurant was a place with sit-down seating. Because we were allowed seats we were then able to get a restaurant license when we opened in 2006 and operate as we do now - as a restaurant.
The main problem was that we could only get 8 seats when we opened, and we told the ANC this in 2007 when we asked for support in bringing our cafe into compliance. This is documented in the minutes. During the process, however, I was able to get the increased seating through a zoning/structural/building review through a Certificate of Occupancy building permit and we completed the construction work in 2008. In spite of Gigi`s claim that she does not feel the cafe space is big enough for the increased seating, load calculations were done by the structural review coordinator as well as fire code review coordinator at DCRA. The work was also fully approved by the DCRA zoning administrator, mechanical engineer, electrical and plumbing engineers, etc.. With this approved building permit we then did not need to pay the large fees to file our map amendment case.
I reviewed these issues with Com. Bonds and Gigi, and filed a full detailed report with the ANC when Gigi requested it in June. To this date, she and Barrie Danneker continue to state the facts incorrectly to the ANC, the public, and the press.
My mistake was to not file the final documents for the final C of O after all work was completed and approved with the building permits. In April, 2010 we informed the ANC and ABRA that the documents still needed to be filed and ABRA said it was not a problem in our application. They did require that it be filed before our application could be approved in the preliminary review. This was done April 23, 2010. Around the same time we decided to file the map amendment case with the office of zoning because it was also a requirement in our application, and also because negative statements were being made by Com. Danneker and Com. Ransom to the public through the Washington City Paper website. Our ABRA reviewer had no problem with the fact that the map amendment was not complete and would take time.
As you can see, the process has been complicated.
I have given Gigi multiple reports on all of these facts, but she continues to present the facts incorrectly.
She also filed a complaint with the Office of Campaign Finance and I was told to not participate in the conversation or communicate with the ANC in any deliberation or ongoing discussion. She then documented in the final ANC Resolution protesting the BBC that I was not responding openly to ANC requests.
Also, we passed out fliers door to door before completing our ABRA application, and held a community meeting on May 18th with residents who raised concerns (which contradicts the ANC claim that we did not reach out to concerned residents). I also notified the residents when the placards were posted on May 28th (which was our only legal requirement for public notification). We then presented to numerous civic associations and to the residents at the ANC meeting and we all agreed at the direction of Chair Anita Bonds to a June 2nd deadline for a voluntary agreement. The neighborhood group then did not respond to numerous requests, and the deadline passed. The group then protested the BBC license just before the July 12th petition period deadline.
There are numerous accusations - including not having a private trash service (under contract since 2006), not having an alcohol license for wine tastings (covered under an ABC caterer`s license), not having permits for music (which are not required in DC law), and not having a DDOT permit for outdoor seating (permitted by DDOT, and fully insured during a full sidewalk cafe permit application process).
The facts in the ANC resolution as stated were inaccurate.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I will do my best to address them.
You can reach me at studavenport@gmail.com
-Stuart
On Jul 21, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Gigi Ransom wrote:
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: stuart davenport
To: tom @ welovedc.com
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 10:37:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Brookland] Fwd: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010
Tom-
If you have any questions please let me know.
Gigi knows that the ANC missed the July 12th deadline to file a protest, and they therefore have no standing in the BBC application. She was informed of this ABRA requirement in early June/July before the deadline, and then was reminded by ABRA the day of the ANC vote.
The below information supplied by Gigi is incorrect. The application with the Office of Zoning was not for a change of our existing use, but for a map amendment to ``correct the non-conforming status`` of the building. This does not affect the legality of the cafe as it operates now - it affects how the cafe can be treated in the future. It ensures that no-one can take away its commercial status, and it allows the cafe to operate without requirement of special exceptions (BZA, etc.).
The BBC had a certificate of occupancy for 8 seats in 2006, for a grocery/deli. By definition (in 2006), a deli was a place with prepared food, and a restaurant was a place with sit-down seating. Because we were allowed seats we were then able to get a restaurant license when we opened in 2006 and operate as we do now - as a restaurant.
The main problem was that we could only get 8 seats when we opened, and we told the ANC this in 2007 when we asked for support in bringing our cafe into compliance. This is documented in the minutes. During the process, however, I was able to get the increased seating through a zoning/structural/building review through a Certificate of Occupancy building permit and we completed the construction work in 2008. In spite of Gigi`s claim that she does not feel the cafe space is big enough for the increased seating, load calculations were done by the structural review coordinator as well as fire code review coordinator at DCRA. The work was also fully approved by the DCRA zoning administrator, mechanical engineer, electrical and plumbing engineers, etc.. With this approved building permit we then did not need to pay the large fees to file our map amendment case.
I reviewed these issues with Com. Bonds and Gigi, and filed a full detailed report with the ANC when Gigi requested it in June. To this date, she and Barrie Danneker continue to state the facts incorrectly to the ANC, the public, and the press.
My mistake was to not file the final documents for the final C of O after all work was completed and approved with the building permits. In April, 2010 we informed the ANC and ABRA that the documents still needed to be filed and ABRA said it was not a problem in our application. They did require that it be filed before our application could be approved in the preliminary review. This was done April 23, 2010. Around the same time we decided to file the map amendment case with the office of zoning because it was also a requirement in our application, and also because negative statements were being made by Com. Danneker and Com. Ransom to the public through the Washington City Paper website. Our ABRA reviewer had no problem with the fact that the map amendment was not complete and would take time.
As you can see, the process has been complicated.
I have given Gigi multiple reports on all of these facts, but she continues to present the facts incorrectly.
She also filed a complaint with the Office of Campaign Finance and I was told to not participate in the conversation or communicate with the ANC in any deliberation or ongoing discussion. She then documented in the final ANC Resolution protesting the BBC that I was not responding openly to ANC requests.
Also, we passed out fliers door to door before completing our ABRA application, and held a community meeting on May 18th with residents who raised concerns (which contradicts the ANC claim that we did not reach out to concerned residents). I also notified the residents when the placards were posted on May 28th (which was our only legal requirement for public notification). We then presented to numerous civic associations and to the residents at the ANC meeting and we all agreed at the direction of Chair Anita Bonds to a June 2nd deadline for a voluntary agreement. The neighborhood group then did not respond to numerous requests, and the deadline passed. The group then protested the BBC license just before the July 12th petition period deadline.
There are numerous accusations - including not having a private trash service (under contract since 2006), not having an alcohol license for wine tastings (covered under an ABC caterer`s license), not having permits for music (which are not required in DC law), and not having a DDOT permit for outdoor seating (permitted by DDOT, and fully insured during a full sidewalk cafe permit application process).
The facts in the ANC resolution as stated were inaccurate.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns and I will do my best to address them.
You can reach me at studavenport@gmail.com
-Stuart
On Jul 21, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Gigi Ransom wrote:
Mr. Bridge,
There you go deflecting again, instead of facing the facts and truth, and addressing the issue in its proper perspective, trying to continue a controversy that doe not exist. The previous market was ``grandfathered in`` during the 50s when the Zoning system was established. I have provided you w/documented proof:
1) per the Office of Zoning notice that the BBC had just filed on June 1, 2010, for the mapping amendment for the ``change of use`` after being in operations since 10/2006;
2) the Occupancy Permit of 10/2006 shows what the zoning was for the prior business; and,
3) the Occupancy Permit of 4/23/2010 some how shows an increase in occupancy from eight (8) in 2006 to suddenly 49 in 2010, without any renovations, expansion of the cafe.
The section from the zoning application reads:
``The property that is the subject of this application consists of Square 3103, Lot 800 in Northwest Washington, D.C. (Ward 5) at 1700 1st Street, N.W. The property is currently zoned R-4. There is C-2-A-zoned property across from the property on both 1st Street and on Florida Avenue. The Applicant proposes a map amendment to rezone the subject property to C-2-A. According to the Applicant, the building has been residentially- zoned, but used commercially, since 1905. `` Meaning, from 2006, he had not done it to date.
Stu had a responsibility to get the zoning changed once he assumed the building and created the cafe. No excuses.
I must point out that I am disappointed that you did not identify yourself in your original post as a journalist, which Ms. Clark later brought to my attention, that you had a reponsibility to research the issues raised to provide a fair and balanced article on the matter. Even if there was a commerical zoning for the market, the use changed to a cafe, and Stu still had to request the change, period.
There are good, reasaonable people who live in Brookland, many who I know, some I have worked and/or testified with on issues. This attempt to insult their intelligence, the majority who I can say have a far better knowledge and understanding of DC Zoning regulations than you, is demeaning.
Gigi Ransom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Bridge
To: ``Brookland @ yahoogroups.com``
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:43:02 PM
Subject: [Brookland] Fwd: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010 [3 Attachments]
Also sent along at the request of Ms. Ransom. Note that it carries the same operative phrase: used as commercial since 1905.
Tom
Begin forwarded message:
From: Gigi Ransom
Date: July 21, 2010 2:37:31 PM EDT
To: Tom Bridge, Glennette Clark
Subject: Fw: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010
Pls. provide the same to Brookland list since cc`d in original post. Thank you. Gigi Ransom
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Gigi Ransom
To: Tom Bridge; Glennette Clark
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:28:13 PM
Subject: Re: Big Bear Cafe
Below and attached. Please share w/Brookland list. Don`t have access from this e-account. Thank you. Gigi
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REGISTER VOL. 57 - NO. 23 JUNE 4 2010
ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NOTICE OF FILING
Z.C. Case No. 10-14
(Map Amendment @ Square 3103, Lot 800)
June 1, 2010
There you go deflecting again, instead of facing the facts and truth, and addressing the issue in its proper perspective, trying to continue a controversy that doe not exist. The previous market was ``grandfathered in`` during the 50s when the Zoning system was established. I have provided you w/documented proof:
1) per the Office of Zoning notice that the BBC had just filed on June 1, 2010, for the mapping amendment for the ``change of use`` after being in operations since 10/2006;
2) the Occupancy Permit of 10/2006 shows what the zoning was for the prior business; and,
3) the Occupancy Permit of 4/23/2010 some how shows an increase in occupancy from eight (8) in 2006 to suddenly 49 in 2010, without any renovations, expansion of the cafe.
The section from the zoning application reads:
``The property that is the subject of this application consists of Square 3103, Lot 800 in Northwest Washington, D.C. (Ward 5) at 1700 1st Street, N.W. The property is currently zoned R-4. There is C-2-A-zoned property across from the property on both 1st Street and on Florida Avenue. The Applicant proposes a map amendment to rezone the subject property to C-2-A. According to the Applicant, the building has been residentially- zoned, but used commercially, since 1905. `` Meaning, from 2006, he had not done it to date.
Stu had a responsibility to get the zoning changed once he assumed the building and created the cafe. No excuses.
I must point out that I am disappointed that you did not identify yourself in your original post as a journalist, which Ms. Clark later brought to my attention, that you had a reponsibility to research the issues raised to provide a fair and balanced article on the matter. Even if there was a commerical zoning for the market, the use changed to a cafe, and Stu still had to request the change, period.
There are good, reasaonable people who live in Brookland, many who I know, some I have worked and/or testified with on issues. This attempt to insult their intelligence, the majority who I can say have a far better knowledge and understanding of DC Zoning regulations than you, is demeaning.
Gigi Ransom
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Bridge
To: ``Brookland @ yahoogroups.com``
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:43:02 PM
Subject: [Brookland] Fwd: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010 [3 Attachments]
Also sent along at the request of Ms. Ransom. Note that it carries the same operative phrase: used as commercial since 1905.
Tom
Begin forwarded message:
From: Gigi Ransom
Date: July 21, 2010 2:37:31 PM EDT
To: Tom Bridge
Subject: Fw: Big Bear Cafe: Now Including Occupancy Permits- 2006 & 2010
Pls. provide the same to Brookland list since cc`d in original post. Thank you. Gigi Ransom
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Gigi Ransom
To: Tom Bridge
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:28:13 PM
Subject: Re: Big Bear Cafe
Below and attached. Please share w/Brookland list. Don`t have access from this e-account. Thank you. Gigi
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REGISTER VOL. 57 - NO. 23 JUNE 4 2010
ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
NOTICE OF FILING
Z.C. Case No. 10-14
(Map Amendment @ Square 3103, Lot 800)
June 1, 2010
THIS CASE IS OF INTEREST TO ANC 5C
On May 27, 2010, the Office of Zoning received an application from Big Bear Café (the ``Applicant``) for approval of map amendment for the above-referenced property.
The property that is the subject of this application consists of Square 3103, Lot 800 in Northwest Washington, D.C. (Ward 5) at 1700 1st Street, N.W. The property is currently zoned R-4. There is C-2-A-zoned property across from the property on both 1st Street and on Florida Avenue. The Applicant proposes a map amendment to rezone the subject property to C-2-A.
According to the Applicant, the building has been residentially- zoned, but used commercially, since 1905. The property currently operates as a commercial deli-style café on the first floor and basement with upper-story housing. The Applicant seeks to retain the upper-story housing and to operate the first-floor and basement commercial use as a commercial restaurant-style café with expanded seating.
On May 27, 2010, the Office of Zoning received an application from Big Bear Café (the ``Applicant``) for approval of map amendment for the above-referenced property.
The property that is the subject of this application consists of Square 3103, Lot 800 in Northwest Washington, D.C. (Ward 5) at 1700 1st Street, N.W. The property is currently zoned R-4. There is C-2-A-zoned property across from the property on both 1st Street and on Florida Avenue. The Applicant proposes a map amendment to rezone the subject property to C-2-A.
According to the Applicant, the building has been residentially- zoned, but used commercially, since 1905. The property currently operates as a commercial deli-style café on the first floor and basement with upper-story housing. The Applicant seeks to retain the upper-story housing and to operate the first-floor and basement commercial use as a commercial restaurant-style café with expanded seating.
For additional information, please contact Sharon S. Schellin, Secretary to the Zoning Commission at (202) 727-6311.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REGISTER VOL. 57 - NO. 23 JUNE 4 2010 Pg 04944
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Bridge
To: Glennette Clark
Cc: Gigi Ransom; Brookland @ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:14:17 PM
Subject: Re: Big Bear Cafe
I`d love for some evidence to be brought to bear that the business has been in operation for THREE YEARS in violation of DC law.
Tom
On Jul 21, 2010, at 2:12 PM, Glennette Clark wrote:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REGISTER VOL. 57 - NO. 23 JUNE 4 2010 Pg 04944
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Bridge
To: Glennette Clark
Cc: Gigi Ransom
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 2:14:17 PM
Subject: Re: Big Bear Cafe
I`d love for some evidence to be brought to bear that the business has been in operation for THREE YEARS in violation of DC law.
Tom
On Jul 21, 2010, at 2:12 PM, Glennette Clark wrote:
Dear Tom,
As a journalist and resident of the Bloomingdale community, I am saddened by the lack of professionalism and research in your article about Big Bear Cafe. Had you bothered to take an objective and unbiased approach to your article, you would have presented both sides of the issue.
It was shoddy work, at best. In the future, to enhance your own credibility, I recommend that you do further investigation into an issue before publishing falsehoods and hearsay.
For the record, Bloomingdale welcomes small businesses that create jobs and enhance the quality of life of the neighbourhood. However, we will not stand idly by while anyone tries to operate in our neighbourhood illegally and without regard for the residents.
Respectfully,
Glennette Clark
Glennette @ gmail. com
Tom Bridge
We Love DC
e. tom @ welovedc.com
Your Life, Beyond the Capitol
As a journalist and resident of the Bloomingdale community, I am saddened by the lack of professionalism and research in your article about Big Bear Cafe. Had you bothered to take an objective and unbiased approach to your article, you would have presented both sides of the issue.
It was shoddy work, at best. In the future, to enhance your own credibility, I recommend that you do further investigation into an issue before publishing falsehoods and hearsay.
For the record, Bloomingdale welcomes small businesses that create jobs and enhance the quality of life of the neighbourhood. However, we will not stand idly by while anyone tries to operate in our neighbourhood illegally and without regard for the residents.
Respectfully,
Glennette Clark
Glennette @ gmail. com
Tom Bridge
We Love DC
e. tom @ welovedc.com
Your Life, Beyond the Capitol
