And click on the link to read the * entire * District Source article.
McMillan Plan would Impact Historic Viewsheds, Says NCPC Staff
As the Zoning Commission readies for yet another night of hearings on the McMillan Sand Filtration redevelopment plan, staff at the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) determined the proposed development would have “substantial impacts” on historic viewsheds toward the U.S. Capitol. The staff report does not reflect a formal action by the NCPC whose review is advisory in nature.
Vision McMillan Partners (VMP) propose 2.1 million square feet of new mixed-use development including residential, commercial, retail and medical uses on the 25-acre site in Northwest D.C.
“NCPC staff has determined that the current development proposal will have substantial impacts on publicly accessible views from the [Armed Forces Retirement Home] Campus, particularly towards the U.S. Capitol Building,” the staff report submitted to the Zoning Commission (ZC) states.
The Armed Forces Retirement Home (AFRH) is just north of the McMillan site and includes several areas of green space with views of the U.S. Capitol Building. The 2008 AFRH-W Master Plan for the site–a plan developed with input from both the District and Federal governments–includes planning priorities to protect those views.
Several structures in the proposed mixed-use development, particularly the medical buildings, are as tall as 115 feet. NCPC’s staff of urban planners questioned the developers’ plans to zone the site as C-3-C and CR, which impact the size and density of allowable new development. C-3-C typically allows buildings up to 90 feet, but under a planned unit development (PUD) they can be as high as 130 feet. VMP is pursuing a PUD and had originally planned for 130-foot buildings, but scaled back to 115-feet at the ZC’s request.
“It appears the impacts to AFRH-W views are a result of the proposed C-3-C and CR zoning, which may be inconsistent with the 2007 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map as well as policies specific to the McMillan site,” the report states.
Staff used viewshed modeling to analyze the impact of the new structures between the U.S. Capitol and the AFRH-W campus on views from two key points: “The Meadow” and the Scott Statue. Based on their modeling even at 100 feet tall the U.S. Capitol would be obscured from the view from the meadow and partially hidden from view from Scott statue.
...
The ZC will take up the McMillan case again Sept. 29.
"PAVE IT , screw the view sheds, we have no obligation to anything but profit for FAT developer bank accounts, we certainly do not have to listen to NCPC" "nobody has testified to the zoning commission to save all 25 acres of the park" Anthony Hood Chairman DC Zoning Commission.
ReplyDeleteWell the Zoning Commissioners certainly do not listen to the community, or read the testimony submitted by dozens of residents, overwhelming opposition to the God awful Vision McMillan Plan, of this community.That doesn't matter in a dictatorship of Democrat incumbent hacks.
Wouldn't you develope the bombed out areas aroound the Red Line before paving over McMillan Park? Not if your Kenyan McDuffie and in the pocket of the real estate plutocracy, who run the corruption in DC!
Muriel Bowser's City Council Committee on Economic Development hearing "oversight DMPED"
Feb. 11, 2014 "Who is minding the FOX"
http://youtu.be/uXkOgHV7Lhw
see this video of hearing exposing fraudulent PR campaign paid for by Deputy Mayor Jeff Miller and Vision McMillan Partners,development conglomerate corrupting our city! They hired
Baltimore PR firm Jamie Fontaine Company and Carmen Group top gun lobbyist work to get City Council in line for massive public land “surplussing”. Give away $100’s of millions to private developer profit from public park land at McMillan Sand Filtration Plant, must be stopped!
To fake grass roots support for McMillan Development, “the monster on Michigan Ave.”
FYI, testimony was submitted by hundreds of residents, over 500 residents, against this development, not dozens as indicated in the previous comment. Residents are overwhelmingly opposed to this development.
ReplyDelete