ANC Commissioners James Fournier, John Salatti and Hugh Youngblood will be holding a joint Singe Member District (SMD) meeting to discuss issues pertaining to McMillan this Thursday, June 16th at All-Nations Baptist Church between 7p -9p. Please the attached flyer and come on by!
Text of the flyer below:
GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Advisory Neighborhood Commission 5C
Bloomingdale Single Member Districts
W. Hugh Youngblood (5C03) anc5C03 @ gmail.com (240) 925 then 1079
James J. Fournier (5C07) James.Fournier9 @ verizon.net (202) 518 then 0059
John T. Salatti (5C04) John.Salatti @ gmail.com (202) 986 then 2592
A Conversation with the Community About the McMillan Sand Filtration Site
We are meeting with the residents of Bloomingdale, Stronghold, Franklin Commons, and Park Place and to bring them up to date about what is going on at the McMillan Site and to get your feedback and opinions about how the ANC should address important issues regarding this major development. Because developing McMillan will change our community permanently, we want to make sure we hear your opinions about how this project should proceed. Here are just some of the issues we will discuss:
o amount of development on the site
o traffic & parking
o storm water runoff
o historic preservation
o retail development
o park space
o community benefits packages
o public facilities
The developers and the city will not be making a separate presentation, but they have presented their viewpoints at many private and community meetings. We will, however, have members from the McMillan Advisory Group present to discuss the topics and issues from their vantage point.
Location: All Nations Baptist Church
(Corner of Rhode Island & North Capitol NE)
Date: Thursday, June 16
Time: 7 pm 9 pm
We want to see you there.
And from your blog moderator:(Corner of Rhode Island & North Capitol NE)
Date: Thursday, June 16
Time: 7 pm 9 pm
We want to see you there.
If you did not read the 06/10/2011 Washington Business Journal article on McMillan, here you go:
D.C. changes course at McMillan, will undertake infrastructure work
Premium content from Washington Business Journal - by Michael Neibauer
Date: Friday, June 10, 2011, 6:00am EDT
http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/print-edition/2011/06/10/dc-changes-course-at-mcmillan-will.html
3 comments:
Thank you for posting this info. As a new resident I've been finding it difficult to learn about such events.
John/James/Hugh/Tony et al,
Thanks for the forum last night and continued attention to this subject which clearly demonstrated, if no other consensus has been reached, all can agree that this is a major issue that will certainly impact all of the adjoining neighborhoods. I look forward to your leadership in moving forward and certainly offer my time and energy.
I've been thinking about some of the comments that were being made towards the end of the evening: going on the offensive, developing a neighborhood plan, etc. While I agree with being proactive, I'm not sure a comprehensive neighborhood plan isn’t perhaps a bridge too far and not quite achievable. I don't doubt the talents of the neighbors, however I do doubt the receptiveness of the city to evaluate such a plan in earnest – and likely throw the whole thing out if a couple of minor points are not to their liking. What I do believe is achievable and would be acceptable from the developers standpoint is perhaps a less robust product that clearly states the minimum conditions under which the ANC/MAG’s approval will be offered. This approach may a bit more amenable to people with disparate strongly held beliefs with a goal of putting all into a single consolidated plan. Those people who are concerned primarily with waste water may not be as concerned with a state of the art park; those people who are concerned with traffic may not be as concerned with waste water; those concerned with historic preservation may not be as concerned with traffic abatement – but we all may be able to agree to our minimum terms when looking at each of these subjects individually – and thus consensus.
Here’s my recommendation. Establish an Objective and a Threshold within each of these independent concerns.
Objective: The best-case scenario.
Threshold: The minimum response that will ensure approval.
I.e.
State of the Art Park-
Objective: A consolidated/continuous area that makes up 50% of the 25 acres and includes an encircling walking/running path; a closed in area for dogs of X acres; a baseball field, and is without a doubt permanently accessible to the public/all dc residents; Establishment of a park conservancy to be established with task of ensuring sustainment/management/access.
Threshold: A consolidated/continuous are that makes up 35% of the 25 acres to include a combination of above.
Traffic Abatement-
Objective: An honest and conservative traffic assessment to include the additional projects within the area that will also be coming on line and will have a direct impact on the traffic volume and schemes within an X mile radius of McMillan and reprioritization and acceleration of additional bus routes, trolley car tracks and brown line.
Threshold: everything above to exclude the brown line.
Historic Preservation-
Objective: Inclusion of and presentation of the historical significance of the site to include use of XX number of underground infrastructure within or adjacent to the park reserve area?
Threshold: Inclusion of and presentation of the historical significance of the site to include above ground infrastructure somewhere on the site.
Waster Water Management-
Objective:
Threshold:
Underground Stream-
Objective:
Threshold:
Architectural Planning-
Objective: An agreed to architectural “model” to which all “pads” must adhere to ensure an aesthetic consistency.
Threshold:
I don’t know enough about the final three to even guess at what may be acceptable to the neighborhood.
While we may not be able to come to a consensus and all subjects at once, perhaps those who feel strongly can assist with establishing our minimum threshold for approval in their areas of concern. Then we can put them all together and voila – Consensus on a set of neighborhood terms which could be used by the Government and Developers to understand very clearly what their plan will need to respond to, at a minimum, for neighborhood approval.
I hope this recommendation helps generate some ideas for the best way forward.
Jamey
S Street NW
John/James/Hugh/Tony et al,
Thanks for the forum last night and continued attention to this subject which clearly demonstrated, if no other consensus has been reached, all can agree that this is a major issue that will certainly impact all of the adjoining neighborhoods. I look forward to your leadership in moving forward and certainly offer my time and energy.
I've been thinking about some of the comments that were being made towards the end of the evening: going on the offensive, developing a neighborhood plan, etc. While I agree with being proactive, I'm not sure a comprehensive neighborhood plan isn’t perhaps a bridge too far and not quite achievable. I don't doubt the talents of the neighbors, however I do doubt the receptiveness of the city to evaluate such a plan in earnest – and likely throw the whole thing out if a couple of minor points are not to their liking. What I do believe is achievable and would be acceptable from the developers standpoint is perhaps a less robust product that clearly states the minimum conditions under which the ANC/MAG’s approval will be offered. This approach may a bit more amenable to people with disparate strongly held beliefs with a goal of putting all into a single consolidated plan. Those people who are concerned primarily with waste water may not be as concerned with a state of the art park; those people who are concerned with traffic may not be as concerned with waste water; those concerned with historic preservation may not be as concerned with traffic abatement – but we all may be able to agree to our minimum terms when looking at each of these subjects individually – and thus consensus.
Here’s my recommendation. Establish an Objective and a Threshold within each of these independent concerns.
Objective: The best-case scenario.
Threshold: The minimum response that will ensure approval.
I.e.
State of the Art Park-
Objective: A consolidated/continuous area that makes up 50% of the 25 acres and includes an encircling walking/running path; a closed in area for dogs of X acres; a baseball field, and is without a doubt permanently accessible to the public/all dc residents; Establishment of a park conservancy to be established with task of ensuring sustainment/management/access.
Threshold: A consolidated/continuous are that makes up 35% of the 25 acres to include a combination of above.
Traffic Abatement-
Objective: An honest and conservative traffic assessment to include the additional projects within the area that will also be coming on line and will have a direct impact on the traffic volume and schemes within an X mile radius of MacMillan and reprioritization and acceleration of additional bus routes, trolley car tracks and brown line.
Threshold: everything above to exclude the brown line.
Historic Preservation-
Objective: Inclusion of and presentation of the historical significance of the site to include use of XX number of underground infrastructure within or adjacent to the park reserve area?
Threshold: Inclusion of and presentation of the historical significance of the site to include above ground infrastructure somewhere on the site.
Waster Water Management-
Underground Stream-
Architectural Planning-
Objective: An agreed to architectural “model” to which all “pads” must adhere to ensure an aesthetic consistency.
Threshold:
I don’t know enough about the final three to even guess at what may be acceptable to the neighborhood but I hope you get the idea.
While we may not be able to come to a consensus on all subjects at once, perhaps those who feel strongly can assist with establishing our minimum threshold for approval in their areas of concern. Then we can put them all together and voila – Consensus on a set of neighborhood terms which could be used by the Government and Developers to understand very clearly what their plan will need to respond to, at a minimum, for neighborhood approval.
I hope this recommendation helps generate some ideas for the best way forward.
Jamey
S Street NW
Post a Comment