For those who weren't in attendance last night, ANC 5E voted to send a resolution in support of the multi-family development on Parcel 2 of the McMillan project. This is part of the Stage 2 application process which has yet to come before the Zoning Commission.
To be clear, while I understand Mr. Lynch's justification, this potential decision is in direct conflict with how the agreement was laid out. Specifically, according to the final proffers (exhibit 864 in the zoning case file) submitted to the zoning commission, affordable housing on the site should be provided as follows:
- Parcel 4 (apartment rentals) - 85 senior units at 50-60% AMI
- Parcel 2 (apartment rentals) - 25 units at 80% AMI
- Parcel 5 (townhomes) - 22 single family rowhomes, 11 at 50% AMI and 11 at 80% AMI
I would encourage those interested in affordable housing in the community to reach out both to the ANC and development team to ensure their honor their commitment to 25 affordable units on Parcel 2.
Mathew Bader
Mat, I'm a bit confused...i thought that Parcel 2 and 3 were to be acted upon later. I guess i assumed it would be another chance for the neighborhood to insist on more green space or more innovative development rather than big square buildings. I see that VMP is trying to push this along with the other stuff, my guess is to facilitate the approval process with the Zoning commission in the future. But is this not another opportunity for the neighborhood to make it's stand?
ReplyDeleteTodd,
ReplyDeleteI think everyone was a bit surprised by this vote.
-- First, the ANC agenda listed this particular item under 'On-Going Community Concerns/Information' and not as a voting item.
-- Second, the ANC agenda labeled this item as 'McMillan Development' but gave no inkling that this discussion involved stage 2 of the project. I personally thought this was an update on the zoning, mayor's agent and LDA processes that recently took place.
-- Third, the resolution that was voted on by the ANC was, once again, not made available to the general public or known about in advance of the meeting. This has been a routine issue with ANC 5E resolutions this year. I encourage everyone to email their respective commissioner asking that they post any resolutions at least a day or two in advance of the meeting along with the agenda.
As such, no one realized that this vote would take place, nor the substance of the vote, until the actual meeting convened and the commissioners were handed the resolution.
To your question/comment:
Parcels 2 and 3 are indeed part of Stage 2 of the development project. As Mr. Jair Lynch stated last night, upon final approval of the master plan and Stage 1 development (acted upon by the zoning commission a week from the past Monday, November 10th), the developer may submit their application for the development of additional parcels.
To that end, the community will still have a chance to weigh in, in front of the zoning commission, for parcels 2 and 3. I'm not sure yet when that might take place but I believe it could be as early as December. As you note, this portion of the project is moving ahead much faster than people anticipated and makes me question why VMP didn't simply file the application for development of all parcels at once.
I would encourage you and others to come out to the hearing whenever it takes place and let your opinions be known, whether in support or in opposition. The structures on Parcel 2 are slated to be 110 feet tall and, I believe, more dense than the Medical Office Building, so there may be another case for arguing that these structures are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
I hope this answers your question and confusion. Thank you for taking the time to read the post.
Mathew Bader
Bloomingdale Civic Association McMillan Advisory Group Representative
I should clarify that my post misstated the affordable housing for the townhomes. While there are 22 affordable townhomes, only 9 will be 50% AMI while 13 will be 80% AMI.
ReplyDeleteMat