Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, and welcome to the National Capital Planning Commission's 04/03/2025 open session. First, secretary Huddl Cox, can you please call the roll?

Yes. Commissioner Cozart? Here. Commissioner McMahon? Commissioner Stidham? Here. Commissioner Argo? Here. Vice chair Hewlett? Here. Chair Goodman? Here. Commissioner Green? Here. Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Here. Commissioner Dixon? Here. Commissioner Cash? Here. Commissioner McGowan?

Right.

Great. Noting the presence of a quorum, I'd like to call the meeting to order. Today's meeting is being live streamed and will be available in a few days as a video on NCPC's website. If there's no objection, the agenda as posted will be the order of business. And now I'd like to ask everyone to please stand for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Today is our April meeting as we noted earlier, and this is the meeting where we elect a vice chair and commission commissioner, and the commission approves the third member of the executive committee. And I'd like to start with the election of a vice chair, and I'll share with the commission that I verified with current vice chair Hewlett her interest in remaining in this position. With that, would there be a motion to approve?

Second. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Thank you very much. Is there any discussion? Is there any discussion? Hearing none, can the secretary please confirm the motion and the second and take the call by word?

Yes. Motion was made by commissioner Dixon and seconded by commissioner Stidham. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner Stidham? Yes. Commissioner Argo?

Yes.

Vice chair Hewlett? Yes. Chair Goodman? Yes. Commissioner Green?

Yes.

Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Yes. Commissioner Dixon? Yes. Commissioner Cash? Yes. Commissioner McGowan?

That's bam.

Thank you. The motion has carried, and congratulations, vice chair Hewlett, and happy early birthday. Would you like

to chair. Say say say that it was a unanimous vote.

Thank you. It was a unanimous vote, and and we'd like to recognize you today, as vice chair. But, also, it's your birthday tomorrow, and we wanna wish you on a on a happy birthday on that occasion. Did you have anything you'd like to say? No. I just would like to thank you for reaching out to me, and

I'd like to thank the commissioners for your for your support and your vote of confidence, and I would love to continue to serve in this capacity. I'm very grateful. Thank you. And I'm grateful to live another year too.

Thank you, commissioner Hewitt. We're glad too. The next agenda item is for the com the commission to approve a third member of the executive committee. I spoke with commissioner Arrington Dixon, and he is willing to con continue on the committee as well. Is there a motion to approve commissioner Arrington Dixon as the third commission member on the executive committee?

I move approval, madam chair.

Thank you. It's been moved. It's been moved by, vice chair Hewlett. Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you. It's been seconded by, commissioner Kozart. I'm sorry. Commissioner Argo. I'm sorry. My apologies. Commissioner Argo, thank you. Is there any discussion on this item? Hearing none, can the secretary please call the vote by roll?

Yes. The motion was made by vice chair Hewlett and seconded by commissioner Argo. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner Stidham? Yes. Commissioner Argo?

Yes.

Vice chair Hewlett? Yes. Chair Goodman? Yes. Commissioner Green?

Yes.

Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Yes. Commissioner Cash?

Yes.

Obstained.

Motion has carried. Congratulations, commissioner Dixon. Would you like to say a few words?

I would just like to make it clear. There was no conspiracy between the the vice chair and

me. Okay.

I'm glad to be back, and thank you all very much.

Thank you, commissioner Dixon. Agenda item number four is report of the chair. And I just wanted to say, I don't know that all of you have heard this, but the former NCPC chair David m Childs passed away last week. We have sent our deepest condolences on behalf of the commission to his family and colleagues and friends. Mister Childs had a profound impact on the nation's capital through his influential work on the plans for the revitalization of Pennsylvania Avenue and the National Mall.

He served as the presidentially appointed chair of NCPC from 1975 to 1981, and he chaired the US Commission of Fine Arts from 2003 to 02/2005. Mister Childs worked in the Washington DC office of Skidmore, Owens, and Merrill from 1971 to 1984. Above all, mister Childs was a gracious, thoughtful, and strategic leader who reinforced the importance of architecture and urban design in the nation's capital as a reflection of our national history, our aspirations, our democratic values, and to make Washington a thriving and vital city. He will be missed. Second, I'd like to share an update on the NCPC flood risk management initiative being led by Julia Coster, staff person Julia Coster.

As commissioners likely remember, Julia gave an information presentation to us at the December 24 meeting on this initiative which began in the fall. Julia briefed me this month on the initiative's progress and I'm very pleased that on 04/10/2025, NCPC will host a multiagency workshop with both local and federal stakeholders to discuss the initiative and what they have discovered regarding the flood risk approaches along the Potomac River. We look forward to hearing an update from the team after the workshop. And finally, now that we are here in April, I'd like to wish everyone a happy spring. Last month, we reviewed the tidal basin master plan and discussed the importance of the cherry blossoms in Washington DC and this very special season.

I know that coming to town, I was a little disappointed. I saw a few, but most of them had had done what the cherry blossoms do. They had a they had a a short life this year based on weather, I understand, from everyone in town, but they were still beautiful. And my daughter sent me pictures from Arlington. My daughter lives here, so we were able to enjoy them from afar. So I hope everyone here who lives in the DC area, metro area, and, counties had a chance to visit the tidal basin in this incredible, site this spring. It was a gorgeous bloom. So that finalizes my report, and the next agenda item number five is report of executive director Marcel Acosta. Marcel?

Thank you, chair Goodman, and good afternoon. I just have two items of public interest. The National Park Service and the district continue to seek public comments on the Poplar Point plan, which is currently under consideration by the commission today and is at a concept master plan level. The deadline for submitting public comments is April 18. Additionally, the park service requests comments on safety and operational improvements for Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. Grain comments are due by May 2. This project will be brought before the commission probably next month. Our website's home page provides information on both public comment opportunities. This concludes my report. You do have my full written report in your package. I'm happy to answer any questions might have.

Thank you, Marcel. Do any of the commissioners online or in person have question executive director.

Specific items to report on

this month. Okay. Thank you very much, Megan. Agenda item number seven is a consent calendar. There are four items on this month's consent calendar.

The first item is to approve preliminary and final site development plans for the Freer Gallery of Art exterior lighting replacement. The second item is to approve preliminary and final building plans for the Freer Gallery of Art wireless communications antenna. The third item is to approve preliminary and final site plans for the National Museum of American History, interim flood mitigation improvements. And the final item is to approve preliminary site and building plans for the DC National Guard Armory Access Control Center. Are there any questions or discussion on the consent items from the commissioners online or in person?

Any questions? Any questions? Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the consent calendar?

Madam chair, I move approval of the consent calendar.

It's been moved by vice chair Hewlett. Is there a second? There is a there is we have a second no. Yes. From commissioner Argo. Thank you. Can you okay. We can hear you. There's a second by commissioner Argo. Thank you. Is there any discussion on this item? Can the secretary please confirm the vote?

Yes. The motion was made by vice chair Hewlett and seconded by commissioner Argo. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner McMahon? Sorry. Commissioner Stidham? Yes. Commissioner Argo? Yes. Vice chair Hewlett? Yes. Chair Goodman? Yes. Commissioner Graham? Commissioner Tunstall Williams?

Yes. Motion

has clearly passed. Thank you very much. We have three items on the open session today. Agenda item 8A is request to approve comments on the concept master plan for Poplar Point. Jamie Her is making the presentation today. Jamie, you can begin.

Heard that right.

I believe in ghosts. Sorry. Okay. So weird. In coordination with Today, we are looking at the concept master plan level where the commission should be focused on issues such as consistency with NCPC's comprehensive plan and other policies, appropriateness of the concept for the site, any particularly unique and or complex issues, and meaningful differences between alternatives if applicable.

In addition, it is important to note that this review is very early in the master planning process. The conceptual alternatives submitted for Poplar Point with the commission's review and comment are very high level and include only block, street, and open space layouts. The density, land uses, and other typical master plan details will be developed for commission review after additional public engagement.

With the

National Environmental Policy Act in March. The commission the comment period for the scoping is open. Today, the commission is reviewing and providing comments on the conceptual master plan alternatives. This review is not an approval of one alternative. The commission's provide feedback to the applicant and identify and is bordered by the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, the Anacostia,

The audio is cutting out for me online. I'm sorry.

Okay.

I will keep talking. I will cover the following topics and review. The project's purpose, site history, existing conditions, guidance, the three alternatives and their respective recommendations review with comparison and general recommendations. Master plan is to meet the requirements of the federal and district government real property act of 02/2006. Other of Poplar Point.

The DC Lands Act specifically requires a minimum of set aside for park parkland for future commemoration that would be conveyed back to the National Park Service in the future in consistency with the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative framework plan to the greatest extent practicable. The planning principles are based on an analysis of existing conditions and incorporating ideas from previous planning efforts, including the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative framework plan. The following planning principles guided the development of the alternatives, expanding the wetlands, celebrate the point, rediscover the shoreline, build upon adjacent projects, focus on metrorail access, connect with Prior to 1882, the area that became Poplar Point was comprised of tidal marshes associated with the Anacostia River. Between 1882 and 1927, sediment dredged from the Anacostia River was placed into these marshes to create developable land. From the mid nineteen twenties until 1983, the western portion of Popper Point site was used for plant nurseries and greenhouses, while the eastern portion was used by the US Navy.

Some of these uses created contamination in the soil that is being monitored jointly by the District Of Columbia and the National Parks Park Service. Poplar Point is in close proximity to several historic areas and sites on both sides of the Anacostia River. The National Park Service initiated section one zero six of the National Historic Preservation Act for the site on 01/27/2025. The area of potential effect is shown in yellow and includes several important historic properties that will be evaluated as part of the section one zero six process. Specifically, as part of the section one zero six consultation process, any possible adverse effects caused by the project will be evaluated, including any possible impacts to important views, the monumental core from historic sites across Poplar Point, such as the Frederick Douglass Historic House pictured here.

There has been extensive planning history for the site, including the Anacostia Waterfront Framework Plan from 2003 that is and community collaborative in 2024. The National Park Service cannot transfer the land until a master plan is approved, meeting the requirements of the DC Lands Act. Poplar Point is surrounded by notable sites and developments, including the in progress Bridge District development, the Berry Farm redevelopment, and historic Anacostia on the other side of I-two 95. Now we'll review the existing conditions on the site. Currently, the site has approximately 5.7 acres of scattered pockets of nontidal wetlands and a high water table.

There are also protected species identified on the site, including the northern long eared bat, the tricolored bat, and the monarch butterfly. The site is relatively flat with elevations at zero feet along the shoreline to 31 feet at the eastern end adjacent to the Eleventh Street Bridge Park, making it extremely vulnerable to flooding. The site contains extensive infrastructure, including the Wamata Metro Tunnel for the green line, the Anacostia River Tunnel, the Stickfoot Branch storm drain, and a variety of other utilities noted here. In addition, there are three buildings on the site, including the National Park Service, National Capital Parks East headquarters, the US Park Police Anacostia operations facility, and the US Park Police Anacostia Aviation facility. All three of these facilities are required to be relocated as part of the land transfer and master plan.

The site is accessible from several locations, including the traffic oval at the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, Howard Avenue Southeast, and the Anacostia Metro Station. The site falls almost completely within the one hundred year and five hundred year flood. Vistas of The US Capitol and Washington Monument as characteristics of the site. As you will see in the analysis, the alternatives to varying degrees consider these vistas in the street, block, and open space patterns. One of these existing vistas is shown here to The US Capitol.

We've highlighted in the executive director's report and later in this presentation where the alternatives proposed development within these vistas. However, additional information, including building height, massing, and specific viewpoints will be needed to further understand the relationship of the master plan alternatives to these vistas. Before I go into the alternatives, I want to highlight some of the relevant guidance from NCPC's planning work. The memorials and museums master plan or two m plan envisioned a future commemoration site on the point with the potential for a new museum site as well. The plan also acknowledged the existing view corridor to The US capital, access to metro rail, and the need to preserve and incorporate existing parkland and the waterfront.

The urban design element of the comprehensive plan also indicates the New Jersey Avenue viewshed from The US Capitol across the Anacostia River to Poplar Point as a significant visual connection as shown on the map on the left as number 12. In addition, Anacostia Waterfront Initiative framework plan suggests creating a visual extension of New Jersey Avenue across the Anacostia River as noted by the yellow arrow. Now I will review the three alternatives. As a reminder, the concept master plan is at an early stage. There will be a number of opportunities for public feedback as the planning process advances.

In general, staff recommends the commission find all three alternatives would help address expansion of the wetlands as a focal feature, include new memorial sites and cultural views, improve use of the shoreline, and provide focal uses on the point, and further finds the three alternatives each contain successful components that may be interchanged or combined in the development of a preferred alternative. For each alternative, I will review the key defining elements of that alternative and end with the recommendations. General recommendations that cover all the alternatives will be included at the conclusion of the alternative comparison. The first concept alternative is alternative a, greenway connections. Alternative a emphasizes greenway connections across the site and into Anacostia, linking the wetlands to the Eleventh Street Bridge Park.

Number one shows the 7.3 acres of wetlands in the center with open views to the river. Number two on the plan indicates a future memorial and cultural use on the point. Number three is the new waterfront park with diagonal roads that lead to it. Overall, this alternative includes 22 acres of development and two future memorial sites. The existing vistas on the site are highlighted in yellow.

This alternative includes a new stand alone pedestrian bridge to increase access to the site with a main roadway in between the development and the river. There are also two new street connections across I 295 at W Street Southeast and Marion Barry Avenue Southeast. Based on the design concept, staff supports the protection of views of The US Capitol and the Washington Monument, important viewsheds that add to the uniqueness of the site, supports the prominent locations identified for two future memorials, including one at the point, supports the absence of development between the wetland and the river, which preserves expansive views and can allow for more natural hydrology, finds that the roadway design creates irregular shaped blocks and intersections that will need refinement as the plan progresses, finds the development pattern results in a potentially unpleasant green space between buildings and the I 295 Freeway, which is a space that may better be better suited for development. Next, we will review alternative B central wetlands. Alternative b is a large central wetland at number one surrounded by development.

This alternative includes 23.2 acres of development around the wetlands and in the center of the site. The alternative places development on the point along with the future cultural use or memorial as indicated by the number two. This alternative includes two other future memorial sites in the center of a public square and at the eastern end of the site adjacent to the Eleventh Street Bridge Park. Number three indicates the proposed activated waterfront park along Anacostia Drive. The existing vistas are noted in yellow.

In addition to alternative a, alternative b includes a new stand alone pedestrian bridge and two new street connections to increase access to the site and a moat main roadway along the riverfront. Based on the design concept, staff finds alternative b respects the viewshed to the Washington Monument, but not the New Jersey Avenue view to The US Capitol. Meaning, the alternative shows development within the area defined as a viewshed. The EDR is testing for the next submission. Supports the prominent locations identified for the three future memorials.

Finds surrounding the wetlands with development, limits views to and from the wetlands and reduces the opportunity for natural river flooding into the wetlands, and finds the development pattern to the east is more efficient with smaller blocks allowing greater porosity, more usable areas for recreation. The last alternative we review is alternative c, anchor use on the point. Alternative c envisions the wetlands framed by development at number one and the large 15 acre use on the point at number two. The Waterfront Park at number three is the largest of the three alternatives with the main roadway pulled back from the river. The wetlands are framed with development on three sides with the anchor used to the north.

This alternative includes the highest amount of development with 27.3 acres, two memorial sites, and a cultural facility all within the large waterfront park. The existing vistas are noted in yellow. This alternative does not include the new pedestrian bridge at Chicago Street Southeast that is proposed in alternatives a and b and instead makes the proposed crossing at W Street Southeast pedestrian only. This alternative does include a street parallel to the river, but it is pulled back, and there is a new connection at Marion Barry Avenue Southeast. Based on the conceptual design for design, meaning the alternate in the area defined as as height and massing, which we are requesting for the next submission, and finds the large anchor use on the point appears disconnected from the rest of the site and depending on the overall massing could have impact on views to and from the wetlands.

Finds Alternative C allows for the greatest amount of recreational space to the east identified as recreational fields. And finds the elimination of the pedestrian bridge at Chicago Street Southeast and conversion of the W Street Southeast bridge to pedestrian only results in the least number of connections to the existing neighborhood. As a reminder of the key elements of each alternative, Alternative A is a large central wetland that is open to the river. Development in Alternative A is concentrated in the center, along the west, and adjacent to the metro station. There are two memorial locations in prominent Park Lake settings.

Alternative b has a central wetland surrounded by development on all sides. This alternative has more open space on the eastern end of the site and three potential memorial sites in a variety of settings. This alternative c includes three memorial sites within the waterfront park and an anchor use at the point. Now I will compare the alternatives by key design elements. First up is the primary existing element on-site driving the design is the design.

In alternative a, the wetlands are open to the river with a backdrop of wooded buffer. Alternative b encloses the wetlands with development, but pairs the wetlands with recreational space. Alternative c places development immediately adjacent to the wetlands with recreational space placed elsewhere. When comparing the alternatives and how they consider open space in the future memorial sites, alternative a includes linear park corridors with memorial sites in park centered spaces. Alternative b includes larger, more active recreation spaces with urban plaza style commemorative spaces.

And alternative c includes a large community park with amenities and waterfront memorial spaces. The comparison of alternatives relative to access shows that alternatives a and b both include multiple roadway connections and a new pedestrian bridge at Chicago Street Southeast, while alternative c does not include the pedestrian bridge at Chicago Street Southeast and instead includes it at W Street, W Street Southeast. The final comparison of alternatives focuses on the point. In alternative a, there is a cultural center with public space in a commemorative location overlooking the river. Alternative b proposes mixed use development with public space, and alternative c includes a large anchor use and public space.

In conclusion, I will wrap up by reviewing the general recommendations that cover all of the alternatives. These recommendations are specific to development and massing for the applicant as they move forward in the design process. Staff supports lining the I 295 corridor in the east oval of the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge with buildings given the amount of noise disturbance and request the following information as part of the next submission, the proposed development density, heights, and land uses, how the proposed development will respect and enhance existing views and vistas both from the site and across the site from historic Anacostia, specifically views along New Jersey Avenue to US Capitol and from the historic Frederick Douglass home as outlined in the federal elements of the comprehensive plan, how a potential anchor use would be incorporated into alternatives a and b, and whether the anchor could work in the green space to the east in alternative c, clarifying what opportunities for public space use could occur in the green spaces based on size, configuration, and location. And more information on the anticipated volume of traffic for this primary roadway, both design, and how pedestrian crossings to the riverfront trail will be accommodated.

As noted earlier, the site has significant flooding challenges. As the applicant continues toward a preferred alternative, staff finds that unlike the West Side of the Anacostia River, this large undeveloped site presents a unique opportunity to connect with the shoreline and model natural flood resiliency in addition to creating a wonderful new neighborhood amenity. In addition, staff requests the following information as part of the next submission. The overall flood mitigation approach for the site, including resilient approaches to allow water on-site and flood proofing. The impacts of achieving the desired elevation of plus 10 feet on the design of the development and open space, particularly the relationship between the Ground Floor level and adjacent public spaces, the intended future of the existing seawall, which is in poor shape, and whether it will continue to provide flood protection or be removed to allow more natural hydrology along with any new flood protection structures, and the status of any coordination with Joint Base Anacostia Bowling, and if and how flood mitigation proposals at both sites are being considered together.

Finally, given the access challenges on the site, staff finds roadways along the shorelines or through wetlands are not desirable but may be necessary given the constraints of the site and requests more information in the next submission regarding the anticipated volume of traffic, the proposed design, and how pedestrian crossings to the riverfront trail will be accommodated. Also, given the long planning history and already high civic interest and potential for the site, staff encourages the applicant to continue coordination and outreach with the community in the development of the master plan, including identifying opportunities for interpretation of the site's history and other uses that would support local needs. This concludes my presentation. I have incorporated the executive director's recommendations into my presentation, so I will not read them again, but I have listed them here for your reference. Whit Smith from the district office of the deputy mayor for planning and economic development is here to provide comments, and representatives from the design team are here to any answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Jamie, and, thank you, Whit, for coming today. And, I'd like to ask the commissioners, are there any questions at this time? Are you going to present?

I'm a quick

Perfect. No.

You can go as long as you like. Thank you. Sorry.

For your response. I appreciate it. Worries. Good afternoon, commissioners, staff, and members of the community. My name is Whit Smith, and I serve in the District Of Columbia Deputy Mayor's Office For Planning And Economic Development, also known as DNPED.

I'm the district lead for the Poplar Point plan. Poplar Point's transformation is a top priority for the mayor, deputy mayor, and the district. The district, in partnership with the National Park Service, has launched our planning efforts, which includes developing an environmental assessment and master plan. That work will involve community engagement to receive input from the public and the surrounding communities of Wards 67, And 8 to ensure the redevelopment aligns with the community and the environmental needs. We have held two community meetings and met with a number of community stakeholders thus far, and we will be hosting an in person workshop this Saturday at Poplar Point.

The planning process is a major step in realizing the vision of the 2003 Anacostia Waterfront Initiative Plan. Poplar Point will be a once in a lifetime opportunity to create economic, cultural, and recreational opportunities along Anacostia Waterfront, in Ward 8. The redevelopment of Poplar Point is an opportunity to improve and develop the site into a community amenity by providing a public publicly accessible waterfront park with cultural, economic, and recreational attractions and activities, spur revitalization efforts East Of The Anacostia River by providing a mix of uses around Metrorail's Anacostia Station, improve access to and expand the recreational amenities within Southern Anacostia Park. The planning process we are leading now is critical to facilitate conveyance of the land from the federal government to District Of Columbia as envisioned in the 2006 federal federal legislation and implements a land use plan for Poplar Point. In addition to the planning process, in September 2024, the district issued a request for expressions of interest to identify a potential destination anchor for the Poplar Point site.

In March, mayor Bowser announced that the district has selected a proposal from Thermo US contingent on completion of the environmental assessment process. We are excited to find such a compatible use with aligning design principles. We're excited to study this transformative anchor at Poplar Point. Our submission included included alternatives for you to evaluate elements of each. We would like to emphasize that the preferred alternative will not be an iteration of the three alternatives but will be a preferred alternative with that incorporates elements of each.

I'm joined here today by my colleagues from the office of planning as well as representatives from HRNA and AECOM who are supporting the district in moving the point forward point plan forward. Excuse me. We look forward to your comments and questions about the project. Thank you.

Appreciate your presence today here and your comments as well. Absolutely. The commissioners the chambers having the questions for our speakers today. Thank

you. I had a question. In the beginning, you showed a series of previous plans for the site.

Do go back to that?

Would you would you mind, please?

I need the PowerPoint back.

You need to drive, don't you?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you. And I'm 15 I'm fifteen minutes younger. I appreciate that. One question is about the the the the plan on the lower right hand corner, the Anacostia Parks and commit community collaborative design from '24. Could you talk a little bit about how that came to be and how that was was or was not incorporated into the alternatives that we're seeing today.

Sure.

And I otherwise, I'm not

Thank you. I'm I'm going to defer to my my colleague.

Thank you.

Hi. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking the time to see to speak with us. My name is Alan Harwood. I'm a planner and urban designer with AECOM. We appreciate your your time today. These plans, all of them were incorporated into the the alternatives. That one specifically is kind of the genesis of the wetlands being the center of the of the plan. We didn't feel like it had enough development to pay for that open space. So it there's 70 acres of open space and about 40 acres left for roads and and development. And so we we kind of took that but but adapted a little bit.

And do you have a target for for developmental for development on the project? Was there a certain number that you acreage you came to that was sort of your

There's the seven at least 70 acres of open space is a mandate in the legislation. Sure. And then that leaves 40 acres from the 110 for roads and developments.

And was the 40 acres, was that because that had enough economic engine to support this, or that's what was left?

That's that's what's left. Okay. And so so try to maximize that to the greatest extent possible.

Thank you. Question.

And are there any other questions? Yes.

I assume you and it may just be early days that you're envisioning this to be mixed use. Right? All types of development? Because I didn't hear anything about the mix. If you could talk a little bit about what you're targeting, that would be great.

Well, I think it's it's gonna be a long term project, so we need to be flexible. Of course. And and so kinda establishing that framework of open space and development and where the appropriate places are is really the first step. But you're right. It's it's gonna be a mixed use. It's probably probably mixed use with a bit of a commercial focus right at the metro stop eventually when that market comes around. But, also, it'll be mixed use with primarily residential focus in a lot of it. But but that's remains to be seen. That that's all part of the next phase as we continue to work with the community to see what they want and what the market bears. And I think h r and a is, you know, top notch firm for looking at those kind of issues.

Thank you. Thank you, commissioner Tunstall Williams. Are there other questions? Sure. Yes, sir. Commissioner Dixon. Well, this well, these are this is questions. We're I'm gonna go round robin in a minute, and everyone can weigh in on there. But this is for questions of the speakers.

You I'll wait to weigh in.

Alright. Thank you. Okay. Sure. Are there any other questions for our guests or for our staff today? K. Hearing no further questions, again, thank you both for the presentation. And, that concludes our public testimony, and now we're going to move, ask for a motion.

Madam chair, we have two public witnesses. Those were just the

I apologize. I'm so sorry. We do have two public witnesses, and the first is Anne Lewis. Please, Anne Lewis is testifying on behalf of the citizens of Poplar Pointe Working Group, and you have five minutes to provide your testimony. Please begin whenever you are ready. I'm ready. Thank you.

Can you

hear me? Yes.

Good day, commissioners, and thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Poplar Point master plan. My name is Anne Lewis, and I'm testifying as a representative of the Citizens Poplar Point Working Group. This working group was created in 2021 for the purposes of keeping the community informed of ongoing public and private plans for Poplar Point and for giving members of the community the opportunity to express their goals for the development. The working group consists of representatives from 10 partner organizations, all of which have an interest in an environmentally responsible plan for Poplar Point that serves the needs of the community. These groups are listed in our written testimony.

From 2022 to 2024, the working group sponsored four public listening sessions, one student charrette and seven presentations by representative from government and the private sector on issues related to Poplar Point, and thank you for those who helped us with this. From these meetings, the working group learned that the community particularly supports the following. Ecological connections, that is preserving this unique area of nature in the city, transportation connections, connecting Poplar Point and its Ward 8 neighborhoods, particularly over I 295, Cultural connections, preserving Poplar Point as an extension of these historic communities. And finally, recreation, establishing high quality recreational facilities and green space to ensure good health of Ward 8 residents. On the basis of what we learned at these meetings, the working group prepared its Poplar Point vision plan, which is actually the plan in the lower right corner.

The plan was released in the 2024, and we've submitted it as part of our testimony. Since this plan directly reflects the needs of the community, we believe it should serve as a guiding document for the development of Poplar Point. Poplar Point is one of the few irreplaceable ecological resources in the district. Ecological restoration and sensitive site use should be at the heart of the sustainable, equitable development for this site and should guide the design and placement of any new buildings, roads and managed landscapes at Poplar Point. We've read the NCPC staff excellent report on NPS's three alternatives, and it's evident that they agree with this approach.

Thus, we substantially agree with the staff's recommendations, especially those that we've listed in our testimony. We do, however, have concerns about the limited area devoted to the expanded wetlands. The requirement to include a minimum of 70 acres devoted to park purposes was clearly intended to preserve most of the extensive natural area that currently exists and that the community views as its own potential nature park. Yet all the alternatives actually diminish that area substantially. NCPC's map of existing conditions shows wetlands extending from close to the oval all the way to the east wall of the Metro Garage, yet all the NPS proposals terminate the wetlands at the Metro Tunnel or less.

This results in an area much smaller than is currently vegetated and will diminish its effectiveness both as a nature experience for the community and as a habitat for the wildlife that people want to see. We strongly recommend that the plan increase the natural area and its associated wetlands to more closely reflect the wild lands that currently exist. Our vision plan also suggests eliminating vehicles from that portion of the road that runs between the natural area and the river. We know that circulation on the site is challenging, but an active roadway between constitute a hazard to wildlife, diminish the park's visitors experience and require an underpass or several of them to keep the animals safe. It would be preferable if this section of the road could be limited to bikes and pedestrians.

Finally, we agree with the staff's recommendation that subsequent submissions include more detailed information on height, elevations, massing and land uses. We suggest this information also include details on the components that will comprise the minimum 70 acres devoted to park purposes with a table that identifies the function and area of each park component. So that small discontinuous we recommend that NPS establish a minimum size for any space included as a park purpose, so that small discontinuous outdoor spaces around buildings or spaces in courtyards will not be permitted to count toward the minimum 70 acre requirement. Also, all the acreages counted as park purposes should be free and open to the public. We appreciate NCPC's support as plans for Poplar Point move forward and look forward to working with NPS and NCPC as these plans develop.

Thank you.

Thank you. Commitment and dedication to this space. Thank you. Our next speaker is a virtual speaker, Tom Skinner. You are testifying on behalf of Red Brick LMD, and you will have five minutes to provide your testimony. Please let us know when you're ready.

Ready. Good afternoon, commissioners. Can you hear me okay?

Yeah. We can hear you. We just wanna make sure you can hear us too.

Okay. Thank you. So there were audio problems earlier, but it looks like everything's working now. Thank you. Very Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Tom Skinner, and I'm a managing partner and the founder of Red Brick L and D. Thank you for the opportunity to provide Red Brick's perspective on the Poplar Point master plan alternatives. Red Brick is the owner of the Bridge District, a two and a half million square foot development adjacent to the park and the metro on the north and south sides of Howard Road. Red Brick is also the Navy's Grand lessee of 15 acres on the Southeast corner of the Washington Navy Yard, fronting the Eleventh Street Bridge Park. Additionally, Red Brick has development rights to the northern 32 acres of Joint Base Anacostia Bollin.

A portion of these 32 acres is one of the three potential sites for the relocation of the NBS facilities from Poplar Point, which is a precondition for moving forward with the development of Poplar Point. So Poplar Point is situated in the middle of Red Brick's three neighborhoods. As a result, we've invested in two master planning studies of Poplar Point, and I'd like to share some thoughts from these studies with the commission. In a year's time, we'll have about 1,500 residents living at the Bridge District. And over the next five fifteen years, we expect to invest $5,000,000,000 or more building out these three locations.

At full build out, they will be home to over 5,000 district residents, cutting edge r and d facilities that employ thousands, world class restaurants and hotels, and open spaces that set new standards. None of these current and future residents and employees could be here today. So it's my duty and honor to speak for them. But I'd also like to say that five minutes for 5,000 residents, five minutes for 5,000 hardworking private and public sector employees, and five minutes for 5,000,000,000 hard earned investment dollars from our nation's retirees and savers is not sufficient. There have been twenty years to develop the plan, and yet now it feels very rushed.

We must continue the active and deliberate collaboration with all affected parties, especially those that have developed an extraordinary expertise, living, breathing, and dreaming this plan over the past ten to fifteen years. If a careful and comprehensive review of the plan takes an extra six months to reach consensus and agreement, so be it. Popular Point is a very special place. And for the sake of future generations, we have to get it right. I'd like to have the time to go into all of our plans in detail.

For example, the road, bike, pedestrian, metro, and water connectivity. But today, I'll emphasize just three main themes. First, the importance of early wins. Second, the importance of an anchor. And third, importance of bridging and connecting the North and south banks of the Anacostia River. We should work together to meet these priorities. So the first priority, early wins. There are going to be many steps in several years before construction of the first new building on Poplar Point commences. The NPS facilities have

to be

relocated. Master plans and local zoning needs to be approved. Environmental remediation needs to be completed. Land in the floodplain has to be elevated. New infrastructure needs to be built, and building designs need to be approved and capital needs to be raised.

However, we can achieve meaningful progress in the near term from public space improvements, often at the edges of Poplar Point. In fact, significant portions of the Eleventh Street Bridge Park, god bless Scott Kratz and his persistence over all of these years, are on Poplar Point land, and that is an excellent example of an early win. We have two proposal about additional early wins. First, our 2020 master plan incorporated a promenade that connected the traffic oval on the south side of the bridge to the Anacostia Metro and then continued to Marriott Barry Avenue and the Eleventh Street Bridge Park. Red Brick has reserved 20 feet on the park side of each bridge district parcel to accommodate this 60 foot wide bike and pedestrian connection.

We would urge NPS to reengage in discussions on their 40 foot wide portion of the promenade, and let's get that built in the next two to three years. Second, our 2015 master plan incorporated a sculpture garden on significant portions of Poplar Point. Think of Storm King in New York. More recently, we've adapted this concept to embrace the spirit of the 01/29/2025 executive order celebrating America's two hundred and fiftieth birthday. A portion of that order reinstates EO 13978, building in the National Garden Of American Heroes.

We envision a garden similar to the Musician's Park in Batroubi, Georgia, but one that celebrates 250 American heroes. Let's get started right away on this part of the project so that we can have a temporary immersive exhibit that provides a taste of the permanent garden in time for our nation's 200 birthday in fifteen months. Second priority is an anchor. I'm not gonna weigh in on the sighting of the anchor and the impact of any proposed anchor on-site lines. I'm sure locations can be adjusted, heights modified, and these important considerations can be accommodated.

What we do know from our expertise and experience is that for Poplar Point to be successful, an anchor is essential. We support Therma, the proposed anchor that I'm sure many of you are aware of. I visited their Bucharest location in the 2022. Thurma embraces the tradition of public baths that has been a keystone of human experience across almost every culture over thousands of years. It also brings a distinctly twenty first century application of this through its embrace of sustainability.

Near and

dear to Red Brook's heart.

Thank you. We appreciate your time.

It is Thank you. I'm sorry. Andy Aultman ceded his five minutes to me. So is it okay if I take an extra couple of minutes to conclude the testimony?

I'm not aware of that. I am are you aware of

it? Well

If you would like to.

Commission, do want to hear the remainder of his comments?

Pardon? Do we want

to hear the remainder

of his I would like to hear. Yes.

Other commissioners, yes? Consensus?

Why not?

It opens up Pandora's box.

Go ahead. Please finish if you can in the next two minutes.

Thank you. It'll be two minutes. Thank you very much. It also brings a distinctly twenty first century application of this through its embrace of sustainability. Near and dear to Red Brick's heart is the Bridge District is the largest ILFI net zero residential project in the country.

Thermal will also deliver hundreds of jobs for the local community and the prospect of iconic architecture that will blend in with the beautiful Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge. Imagine the Sudbury Opera House on the South Bank Of The Anacostia. The third priority is bridging the North and South Banks of the river. Former mayor Anthony Williams, who recruited Andy Altman to be the director of DC office planning, likes to tell how he laid a map of the Seine River over the Anacostia, and it was almost a perfect match. We all know that in urban planning, great retail corridors must have two sided retail to be successful.

Similarly, I believe that great cities must have two sided waterways. If one thinks of London or Paris or most other world class cities, there's constant pedestrian, bike, boat, and private and mass transit crossing rivers and connecting communities. If one pulls out a map of DC and follows the Potomac River from north to south and the Anacostia River from west to east, you'll quickly realize that this mile stretch of river between the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge and the Eleventh Street Bridge is a unique opportunity to achieve this in Washington DC. So we have an unprecedented opportunity to transform Poplar Point to be a showcase for the region and the envy of cities around the world. Let's take the time to complete that vision with the support of all stakeholders and residents.

And let me quote by let me conclude by quoting Mayor Williams' vision from 02/2002. And how will we know when these seeds have grown into the one magnificent city that we are destined to be? We will know when we stand on the hill at Saint Elizabeth's and look out at the Anacostia and see people shopping, working, eating, swimming, boating, and bringing their out of town guests to see the jewel of our city.

Thank you very much. We appreciate your contributions today, and thank you.

Thank you.

Commission for your generosity and letting him finish his remarks. So right now, we're asking, does anyone have a question? Any commissioners online or in person have question for Anne Lewis or for, mister Tom Skinner? Are there any The same. Questions? No. Yeah.

Questions or comment, may have better way because it's it's a comment more than a question. I appreciate your testimony.

Okay. Alright. Any any questions for Anne or for Tom? Okay. Hearing none, then, that concludes public testimony. And I would, like to thank our speakers for coming today and making their contributions. Thank you very much. This is obvious a very important project for the public and and for the for the district and for the region. Is there a motion to approve the comments on the concept master plan for Papua New

I move that we have

Been moved by commissioner Dixon. Second. Seconded by vice chair Hewlett. So now we're gonna open up this project for a discussion by the commission, and I'm going to start, deliberations with commissioner Dixon.

Thank you very much, madam. First of all, I'm, wanna trap stop me. I don't wanna be too verbose, but I got a lot of thoughts. And let me give you some foundation. I am a resident of Anacostia River East, and I have I'm not red brick. I'm green brick. My house is the greenhouse on Shannon Place, a block from the metro station. And I grew up in that block, and I'm still in that block. I can't seem to leave it. Now I live in a home.

We did live in an apartment that was torn down to build Savoy School. The Anacostia area or Anacostia Park has been was a playground for me as a child. So I go back a long way, along with it further back than most anybody in this room, I would think. We also used to I used to use it a lot, go there a lot, and had a lot of access to it. So I'm really excited about the access discussion we have today.

I also would like to be I'm encouraged by the fact that the the the community group got together to evaluate possibilities and particularly happy that Red Brick is engaged. They got a lot at stake. When you got a lot at stake, you do a lot of serious thinking. And I'm I'm I'm with them a 100%. I would like to see their building because even though I don't have any plans to move, I'd like to see what we got in that beautiful building, and what what their plans are.

Maybe I can have a discussion with them at some point as a local resident about what they're planning. My my concerns about my interest in what's going on, first of all, the the the spirit of that community is comes from Native Americans. Native Americans, when you look at maps of the of the city where Native Americans existed, they were all along the Anacostia River east side of the river. So I hope as we move forward in all our efforts, we try to incorporate that presence. It would be very interesting for a memorial of some kind to be one of those memorials to recognize their presence in this neighborhood and community because it ties our community to historical the folks who were really here at first.

I also am am concerned that the one of wetlands, which are at the first in our oval, we might it's been asked by by Diane Dale, who's been at this for a long time, that this be considered the Frederick Douglass Gardens. And maybe that could be at least and she's a resident from the community that grew up with me. I'm also, interested in a a flow. I'm actually concerned about traffic flow and access because if you come into my community at rush hours or maybe almost anytime, there's, a five block backup on MLK going to, the the the towards the Eleventh Street Bridge, and either way you go. And it's really and we're closing down a lot of lanes for bikes, and I think that's a good idea.

I think that we wanna be more of a walking and maybe a metro riding community. And that's that's I think that's a goal, but it's good. The park itself, I have a lot of ideas and concepts and concerns about it. I'd like to really have and I'd ask the staff here to maybe have some, sidebar time because, I got a lot of I got a page here of notes, which is, like, my thoughts kind of all over the place. And I would like to be able to not take up your time with this commission, but talk maybe, off record with some folks about what's going on.

This is very special to me. I've been in a very interesting position. I am senior enough that I knew it when it's when it was when it was a playground for me. And now I'm senior enough to know where it might be going and hopeful that I'll be able to play, well, maybe not play, but go to that land and enjoy some of these amenities, particularly the water the water treatment that is the the the facility that's going on in Buzzard Point, if I can afford to go in. But that's that's that's that's much of my comment. There's a lot more on my paper here, but, frankly, I can't make out all my notes right now. Thank you.

Thank you, commissioner Dixon. It's great to hear your passion, and, we appreciate your comments, as a resident of this. Thank you.

Commissioner I want to also say one other thing. Uh-huh. I gotta make this clear. Well, I chaired the Anacostia Coordinating Council for thirty five years, and I also funded it, and I didn't do it as a write off. I did it as a bottom line contribution. We did a number of public public forums on the Anacostia Park. We got all kinds of plans from the community, and much of what we asked for is included in what I see now. So this is not a new dance for me trying to be engaged in it from a planning standpoint. And that data and information, I see percolating up into some of these plans. So hope we can we can we can keep that going. Thank you.

Thank you, commissioner Dixon. Commissioner Cash.

I won't try to follow that up, but I'll thank the staff for for the presentation and for our presenters for for their contributions. So thanks.

Thank you very much, commissioner Cash. And now we have commissioner we don't have a senate representative yet. So commissioner McGowan. Commissioner McGowan, are you still with us?

Yes. I am. I don't have any comments at the time, but appreciate the Thank you.

Thank you very much, commissioner McGowan. Commissioner Kozart.

I too wanna thank the staff for a great presentation and the work on what's a really important project. And my colleague from the district shared how important it is, and I just wanna underscore the piece that this is an important piece of the Anacostia Waterfront initiative. Right? And, you know, commissioner Dixon talked about, like, how long this takes to realize. Right?

And so this is a really important piece of it. Right. And couldn't agree more that it's important to take the time. The other piece to underscore is that we certainly are in having done some of this work through Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, done work with, National Park Service before in a good position in terms of this kind of handoff. It's a partnership until we do the handoff, and I'm really proud of that, and the way that's working, particularly in the times that we find ourselves in.

So I'm just really appreciative, of that partnership, and, hopefully, that's evident to the commission, here. And I just just also wanna underscore what miss Her shared about this thing in early stages. And so this is the time to share your list of notes once you're able to read through what they are. And for others who are are listening to this and others that we may encounter to be able to just share what are their kind of visions and places where this master plan can really lift up the the aspirations that folks have for waterfront in this kind of final frontier of our waterfront here in the district.

Great. Thank you very much, commissioner Kozart. Commissioner Stidham.

It's really hard to follow that. The the national parks I mean, we've been thinking and working with the district and talking about Poplar Point most of my career, frankly.

And

so, you know, it's it's while we are moving in a very forward direction at this time, there this is not new. I mean, we've been talking with the community. We've been talking with everyone. We are at a really critical point where we're really taking as much feedback as we can get from whomever is willing to offer it. So cannot reiterate enough that we are at the very beginning stages and the importance of the public involvement at this stage. And it it is a great it's a generational opportunity for the district, and we're really happy to be a partner in this work.

Very good. Thank you so much, commissioner. Commissioner Argo. I don't have any additional comments. I'm impressed with the work that's going on, but, I'm also even though I haven't been on the commission all conversations that have been going on.

I've lived in district for over thirty years. So it's great to see some meat on the bones and to I just you know, I I'd like to see the continued acceleration of this plan and not have it stall out in some way, which my memory is that has happened before. So onward and upward. Thank you. Thank you very much, commissioner Argo. Vice chair Hewlett. Yes. First, I'd like

to thank miss Her for her presentation and also for for the detailed explanation of the three alternatives because it was far more than was encompassed in the report. So that was very helpful for me. And I want also wanted to thank the pop the Citizens Popular Point Workgroup at and for your comments and for your steadfast work on this. And to reiterate what everyone else has said that notwithstanding how long this has been in the process, the actual concept plan is still at the early stages. The actual plan master plan is still in its early stages.

So for those who feel you need more time to convey your your sentiments, you do have that time. You we accept written testimony, and there's an opportunity to work with the work group. And so there'll be other opportunities in the future. So I just wanted to say thank you, and thank you to mister Smith and others who have presented as well. Thanks. Thank you very much, vice chair Hewitt. And commissioner Greene?

Thank you very much. No. I appreciate the the the presentation, and and I personally would recommend further development of approach a with a little bit with additional focus on the the really terrific 2024 community plan. Because I think when we could, we need when we can, we need to look at ways to model natural flood resilience. This is a great opportunity here for that. You know? We had no choice but to armor the tidal basin. You know? We should really be looking for natural approaches when we can, and this is an excellent opportunity. It's right there before us.

And it's it's it's the most, not only the most economical way to do it, but the most sustainable way to do it. And and as the problem gets worse, this is a place where we could look to make it better. Mhmm. Furthermore, I think with just just additional suggestions as as others have brought up to really emphasize, you know, natural connections, transportation connections, neighborhood connections, and green space. That should really be prioritized in this plan.

And, and I appreciate the, again, the twenty the twenty twenty four community plan. And I would again, ask to look for ways to increase the natural areas in the wetlands and not by is not by small discontinuous elements, but in meaningful blocks. And and I thought that was an excellent suggestion to limit that portion of the road to bikes pedestrians just to to support that use. And then finally, I think this is also a really interesting opportunity to think about what a memorial is and what a monument might be now. Doesn't necessarily have to be a static physical object. There might be another way to do that. And given the natural resources on this site, there's some really interesting cues and really interesting ways that this could go. So thank you very much.

Thank you, commissioner Green. We commissioner Tunstall Williams?

Please do. Another hard one

to follow. Thank you all for

the presentations. Really exciting project. I think placemaking in the city when you get to kinda start from a a bear while there are things there, gives us an opportunity to be thoughtful. And when this the thing that gives me most pause is looking at that flood map and thinking, gosh. We're gonna be building here.

What are we gonna do? And so I think we need to think very early about resilience and how we do that. And one of the things that struck me is you've got development kind of coming up very close. Could you think about spreading the development more that it's running along the 295 Corridor? I understand there's a value in having the parks to the east, but maybe we think of that really the greens were, like, following the river, setting the development back.

I I'm sort of not pro road along there. I think, you know, bikes and pedestrians are huge. I think the one thing about this neighborhood as well, it's surrounded by roads. It's hard to get to, and you you're going at at speed. So is there a way to sort of slow that down and connect the neighborhood back to the city? I think you should definitely look at it. It's also an island. And so my my quest question about mixed use, I think we need to be thinking about the things that are happening there, need to be able to support everything a neighborhood might need because it is hard to kinda move from there. If, like, grocery stores and all the things that residents that need, I think all of that should be occurring there. Let's see what else they have.

One of the the precedents, I I think the Southeast Federal Center and Yards Park redevelopment has done a good job of pulling the development back for a city. And now Brookfield have done a great job leaving sort of money on the table by allowing for public space. And I think concentrating what's happening immediately adjacent to whatever the green space is to to more public uses as opposed to private high end residences. I think that's one of the challenges in the city that not enough people have access to the waterfront. So looking at opportunities to do that. But, otherwise, I think it's a great project. I look forward to seeing how it develops.

Thank you, commissioner Williams. And I just like to associate my my remarks with the last two commissioners. I'm particularly impressed by the work that miss Skinner's group I'm sorry, miss Lewis' group has done with the neighborhood and the planning that's been there for generations. And, of course, with commissioner Dixon's, you know, testimony as a as a neighbor and resident of the space. And I I think too that this this is a perfect opportunity for us to create a model that can be seen across the nation in the world for resiliency in these kind of threatened and necessary wetland areas that have to become the buffer for the community against the rain events we're all experiencing.

And so I think that, you know, I'm glad we're at the early stage of looking at these concepts. I think it's really important to look at it from all the different lenses that have been mentioned today. I think as a recreational side, as as housing mixed use, the transportation, I would would concur that the transportation close to the water, unless it's bike and pedestrian, doesn't make all the sense in the world, but perhaps there's a way to find that that access that's, you know, represented in some of these plans. But just, you know, as as was mentioned here today, we're early in the process, and I really look forward to, the work ahead, the, you know, the collaborative work ahead with all the stakeholders of this important space and with an eye toward the fact that flooding is something we have to live with and inundateable structures are possible and design and architecture around those types of buildings is possible. And I really wanna thank the staff for the great presentation.

Thank you very much, Jamie, and also for the contributions, from the community and from our other advocates around the community. So thank you all, and I'm looking forward to seeing the next iteration. I just wanna add. Yes. Commissioner Dixon.

We're dealing with the very, I like the community, and I'm very pleased, miss miss Fit, that you all are getting to us, getting this kind of feedback. The community is made up of 70% renters. So folks don't feel that they may be they're stable there to be engaged in what's gonna come to them. And that's changing too. I mean, we had bricks huge building, all these new residents coming in who really appreciate this.

I'd like to see how we can you know, you said it's it's long it's been a long time coming. For me, it's been a real long time coming. So I just hope that that we can move with some dispatch, but we move with dispatch, acknowledge the fact that the population is is changing, and I hope that the local government can try to look at ways to keep some residents like me there and others there to be able to be benefit and enjoy what comes. But as these things come online, property taxes go up. I mean, I'm sure that my place is gonna that neighborhood is gonna be very, very good to be in.

You can walk two blocks to a river that has all the amenities. So I'm I'm I'm not I think we gotta think about how we can try to preserve the population some way legislatively so that we can try to keep people who are in Anacostia River East there to enjoy this and maybe their families as well. It's a legacy issue. Thank you.

Thank you. So displacement needs to be kept in mind. Yes. Yeah. Thank you very much. Alright. Any other comments before we move on? Could the secretary please confirm the motion and the second and take the vote by roll?

The motion was made by commissioner Dixon and seconded by vice chair Hewlett. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner Stidham?

Yes.

Commissioner Argo? Yes. Vice chair Hewlett? Yes. Chair Goodman? Yes. Commissioner Green?

Yes.

Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Yes. Commissioner Dixon? Yes. Commissioner Cash? Yes. Commissioner McGowan? Yes. Same.

Thank you very much. The motion has carried. Agenda item eight b is a request to approve preliminary and final site development plans for the Long Bridge Corridor project, north section. And today, Michael Weil is making the presentation. Thank you, Michael.

Very much. Mhmm.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, chair Goodman and members of the commission, The National Park Service on behalf of the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority or VPRA has submitted plans to improve a section of the Long Bridge Railway Corridor that crosses through East Potomac Park and over Maine Avenue in Southwest Southwest Washington DC. As background, the project would add two new tracks to the Long Bridge Corridor for a total of four tracks with the purpose of providing additional capacity and improved travel reliability into the city and through the region for the direct benefit of passenger rail service. And this project is part of a larger plan by VPRA to improve service throughout the state of Virginia. Previously, our commission approved the preliminary plans for the corridor widening improvements across the federal land here back in July 2022. However, we did not review the improvements to the district controlled areas along Maine Avenue since v VPRA required additional time to work with adjacent property owners at that time.

Since then, although VPRA is in the process of designing the corridor in a unified manner, They have divided the project into two different sections, the north section, which we are reviewing here today, and the south section, which NPS will submit to the commission in the future. So for today's meeting, we are reviewing the final plans for improvements to East Potomac Park and the Washington Channel as federal property, and then we are also reviewing the corridor plans for the district controlled areas that as a combined preliminary and final review action here today. As a final submission package, we are considering issues like the project's final landscape plans, its overall architectural aesthetic, and how VPRA has responded to the commission's previous preliminary approval comments. Today, the existing Longbridge corridor consists of two tracks that are aligned across East Potomac Park over a series of bridges and along an elevated embankment with a mix of trees and shrubs lining both sides of the tracks as shown here in these photos. Here's a close-up of the project area as it crosses through East Potomac Park with a number of notable features, including the Metro Rail portal, the National Park Service's main, National Mall And Memorials Park's headquarters complex, and several baseball fields located along East, Drive excuse me.

Ohio Drive East. Here's a close-up of the affected district controlled property, the Washington Marina surface lot, which will be reconfigured, and various changes made within the Main Avenue right away that are necessary, to accommodate the wider railway bridge and new pedestrian bridge there. Here are ground views of three of the railway bridges today crossing over I 395, Ohio, Drive East in the Washington Channel. And then here is the railway bridge as it crosses over Main Avenue. And then here is the existing nearby pedestrian bridge, which is owned by the Portals Development Improvement Association.

VPRA will demolish and rebuild the bridge just to the southeast of its current location to make way for the new wider railway bridge. The bridge currently provides direct pedestrian access between the Washington Marina And Wharf area and the portal's development and larger Maryland Avenue corridor area. So with that, I will now walk you through the north section project submission. Here's a summary table, on the right side that shows the basic elements of the project, a series of new retaining walls and bridges with new landscaping and lighting along the future widened four track corridor. Here are the five improved bridge locations.

And similar to this rendering of the new bridge over I 395, all of the new bridges would consist of either through girder or simply supported designs with weathering steel side walls and a more for a more utilitarian and consistent look. Here's the new wider rail bridge over Ohio Drive East, again, with the noticeable weathered steel sides. And as part of a section one zero six agreement between BPRA and the National Park Service, the new bridge will reuse some, stone from the existing bridge's piers and abutments to help preserve the corridor aesthetic as it passes through the East And West Potomac Parks Historic District. BPRA will also preserve a portion of the existing Washington Channel Bridge's wing walls, again, to help preserve the projects, project area's historic aesthetic. Here's the new railway bridge over Main Avenue, again, with a similar appearance.

And then the new pedestrian bridge over Main Avenue, and this design echoes back to the bridge's original purpose, providing rail access to a rail yard that was previously in the area at that time of its original construction. The new bridge will have elevated planting beds with an interior deck and railings similar to the the existing bridge, and VPRA developed the design in coordination with the Portals Development Improvements Association, which will maintain ownership of the bridge in order to preserve this direct pedestrian connection between the Southwest, waterfront area, and the larger Maryland Avenue corridor. There will be multiple new retaining walls as shown here on the slide along the corridor ranging from five to 25 feet in height above the ground level with topside six foot high concrete parapet walls, and then granite cladding with a running block pattern varying stone heights and a rough finish on the lower portion of the walls. And the granite is the same stone used to construct the historic long bridges, piers, and wing walls and parts of other bridges along the corridor today. Here are several retaining wall elevations without the new landscaping, which show the new granite cladding.

And here's a close-up of the cladding that depicts the running block pattern and the cladding's rough finish. And we note the use of the cladding and weathered steel in the new bridges as key design features, which are intended to present a consistent corridor aesthetic and to approximate the original historic pier and abutment stone materials along the corridor. In terms of new landscaping, BPRA developed a design that provides a natural look to the corridor with a variety of native and nonnative trees, shrubs, and ground covers. There will be a wide variety of canopy, ornamental and evergreen trees with mostly native species used, but the plans do show some nonnative species that are based on the East Potomac Park's historic planting plans. We note our support for the proposed planting palette as part of our executive director's recommendation comments.

Here you can see an example of the plan spacing and mix of tree types with the intent of establishing a more natural look rather than more defined linear vegetative buffers along both sides of the corridor. The new trees would be different heights and positioned in such a way that there would be filtered views of the new retaining walls with periodic gaps in the new vegetation as shown here in this elevation. And here is another elevation that shows this condition as well. Where possible, VPRA would preserve existing trees in the park such as the trees surrounding the East Potomac Park ballfields, and then new trees would be planted closer to the future corridor to replace the impacted trees. And here are several aerial views that help convey the planned layering of the future landscape along the corridor.

And we find the new landscaping does accomplish the design goal of creating a natural looking mix and arrangement of trees and vegetation within the project area. Here's a close-up of the future reconfigured Washington Marina lot, which will maintain its 76 space capacity. BPRA would plant trees along the new ADA accessible switchback ramp and stairs that lead up to the new pedestrian bridge with a colorful mixture of shrubs and ground covers and various pollinator species. And we note the new landscaping scheme would provide visual interest and shade to the area as a place with higher pedestrian activity, and this was based on a previous recommendation by the commission. We note the landscape plans do comply with our tree replacement policy as well as our pollinator best practices guidelines.

And while we, did receive a request for public testimony on these plans previously, The witnesses since, withdrawn their request since VPRA was able to accommodate their comments, in the final landscape design. In addition, we find the, that overall, the final project design is consistent with our previous comments to approximate the corridors defining features in the new design vocabulary. Here is a rendering that depicts the future lighting for the main avenue area, which will have lighting levels that are similar to today's levels. In general, VPRA will preserve the corridors, nighttime pedestrian, and vehicular safety lighting as shown here with approximately 30 locational changes that are necessary to accommodate the wider corridor, and this is noted in our staff comments. So with that, that concludes my presentation, and these comments are all included in our staff report to the commission.

And I have also incorporated many many of these into my presentation here today. Staff has prepared a record of decision to conclude NCPC's responsibility for the affected federal property along the corridor under NEPA, and our ROD is based on the Federal, Railroad Administration's previous 2020 EIS and ROD, as well as the 2024 reevaluation NEPA study. And finally, I would like to note that we have Charlene Cleveland and Naomi Klein here today. Charlene is the project manager on behalf of VPRA, and she would like to provide a brief statement in support of the project. And then she and her design team will be available to respond to any technical project related questions.

Her design team is all virtual today. And then you, Lee, will also be able to respond to any questions on behalf of the National Park Service.

Thank you. You, Michael, and welcome, Cherilyn Leibbrandt. And please feel free to recognize your team as well. Okay. Naomi Klein is a

planner on the project, and we have a

whole slew of each I don't know if we wanna for every person, but Wonderful.

They're available to answer questions. We have landscape architects, designers, that kind of thing.

Thank you. We cover all the basics. Thank you, and welcome.

Thank you so much. So, again, my name is Charlene Cleveland. I am the senior director of the Long Bridge project for the Virginia Passenger Rail Authority. Thank you for allowing us to speak in support of the project as we seek the approval of the north package, a portion of the project overland in DC, a critical step in advancing one of the most transformative infrastructure projects in the region. The Longbridge project is a cornerstone of Virginia's transforming rail in Virginia initiative, a $2,300,000,000 investment that will significantly expand rail capacity, improve mobility, and support economic growth in the DC region along the East Coast.

These two new rail tracks, including a new bridge across the Potomac River built parallel to the existing 119 year old structure, will alleviate one of the most critical rail bottlenecks in the country, allowing for increased capacity for both freight and passenger rail services. This project will enable Amtrak Virginia to expand its service from eight to 13 daily round trips, improving service along the Northeast Corridor and offering passengers more frequent and reliable travel options. It will also provide expanded service for the Virginia Railway Express or VRE, including new evening and weekend trains, ensuring more flexible and convenient options for commuters. The project's ability to separate passenger rail from freight rail will enhance the on time performance for both, making travel and logistics more efficient. Importantly, the Longbridge project will also help reduce traffic ingestion by offering Virginians a reliable alternative to driving.

By increasing the capacity of rail, the project will ease the burden on our highways, improving overall transportation in the region. In addition, it's expected to contribute $7,200,000,000 to Virginia's economy, supporting growth and job creation for years to come. Since launching Virginia state supported service in 02/2009, ridership has grown substantially with Amtrak Virginia carrying over 1,300,000 passengers in 2023 alone. The Longbridge project is essential to provide for this increasing demand, ensuring that rail remains a viable and effective mode of transportation. And now at this point, I would be remiss if I I'd take a moment to acknowledge the valuable partnership we have had with NCPC staff throughout the many years of the development of this project.

The staff work sessions have been incredibly beneficial in refining the project, and we truly appreciate my and the team's collaboration and thoughtful input as we move forward. Your approval of the north package today moves us one step closer to making the project's vision a reality. On behalf of VPRA, I thank you for your time and consideration and look forward to continuing this partnership to deliver a modern, efficient, and connected rail network. Thank you.

Thank you, Shirley, and thanks to your team, and thanks, Michael. That was a great recognition of our staff too. So we appreciate the partnership. Are there any questions right now from any of the commissioners in chambers or online? Yes. Commissioner Cash.

So I just wanna confirm. So one of the things that we heard out about a lot when this first came before us was the pedestrian connection to the salamander. So everyone's happy there. The bridge isn't gonna

be out of commission for too long. There's, like, gonna be a priority on getting that open back up to make the portals happy. So, yes, when I when I spoke to VPRA and they can provide more details, they have been meeting my understanding is they have been meeting with the Salamander Hotel and and the property owners there monthly over the last

Since twenty

years too. To work through those access management issues during the construction phase and beyond.

We'll be providing a temporary pedestrian bridge during construction, so they will never be without a pedestrian bridge.

K. Thank you. Commissioner Cash. Other questions? I'm sorry. Yes. Commissioner Kossar.

Thank you. Just for clarity on kind of time frame and next steps, Could you say just, like, one sentence about that? I think I may have missed it.

So for time frame, we are, this is a progressive design build project. If you know what that means, it means there's a phase one and a phase two. So right now, we are basically, moving to a 100% design completion, and doing early works packages while we negotiate the price of the total contract. So we were looking forward, to to doing these early works packages. They're kind of sprinkled throughout the project, just stuff that needs to be done early in order to preserve the schedule. And then as we, get to a final price for phase two, we would be looking to start construction everywhere. Now mind you, there is a south package as well. So we will be coming back with with that project. They just got started. They're at 30%. But I would say in about six months, we will be coming up and presenting them to this group.

Thank you. Thank

you. Any further questions from the commission of our staff or guest? No? Hearing none, thank you very much then again. Thank you, Sherlene, thanks, Michael, for your presentation. Is there a motion to approve the preliminary and final site development plans for the Long Bridge Quarter project north section? So moved. It's been moved by Second. It's been moved and seconded, and we will now, open this, this project up for a discussion by the commissioners. And I'm going to start with commissioner Stidham. Thank

you. And and thank you, mister Well, for your presentation. We have been working with VPRA on this project for I don't even know how long. It feels like a really, really long time, But it will be, you know, talk about a transformational project in terms of transportation. Mhmm. And part of this project that will be coming later includes a bike ped bridge that will be crossing the river that will also be transformational. So, I really don't have much more to say other than it's been great working with VPRA, and we look forward to, finishing up.

Great. Thank you so much. Commissioner Steadham, commissioner Argo. I don't have any additional comments or questions. Just very excited to see this moving forward. Will be a transformational problem, you know, in so many ways. Thank you. Thank you so much, commissioner Argo. Vice chair Hewlett.

Yes. Thank you, mister Wall, for your presentation, and thank you for, your hard work. And it it seems very exciting. It's very exciting of, much needed project, so and definitely transformative. Yeah.

Thank you, vice chair Hewitt. Commissioner Green.

Thank you. No. It's a and as a Virginia frequent writer of Amtrak, I greatly look forward to the increased capacity. Spent a little while this morning sitting in this stretch, and that would be terrific. I mean, it's just the more trains, the merrier. And,

which

is the more connect the more connectivity, the more we can penetrate in Virginia with Amtrak. It'll be terrific. So I I think it's a wonderful project and very much look forward to this being completed. Thank

you. Great.

Thank you, commissioner Green. Commissioner to install Williams.

Yeah. Great project. And just because I can't help myself, I know I'm late to the game here. I'm intrigued by the the choice of the weathered steel. I'd like to the verdigris that is there now. So just I'm not gonna stand in the way of that, but I it just seems very industrial for an area that is not so much.

So that's alright. Otherwise, nice work. Thank you, commissioner Tunstall Williams. Commissioner Dixon.

Fine. Thank you very much.

Thank you, commissioner Dixon. Commissioner Cash?

Thanks, staff, for the presentation or for the update.

Thank you, commissioner Cash. Commissioner McGowan?

No comment, but thank you so much for the presentation.

Thank you, commissioner McGowan. Commissioner Kozart.

I appreciate the staff for your hard work on this, and, no additional comments.

Thank you very much, commissioner Cozart. And I'd like to thank the applicant team and the staff for their work on this impressive project. This is an infrastructure project I know just from the small town that I hail from. Working with railroads, a fast, project. It's always it takes years, and it takes a lot of coordination.

I cannot imagine the work that you all have gone through in order to get it to this point today. So really appreciate the improvements that are gonna be made, creating greater connectivity and creating greater mobility and safety for all. I look forward to seeing the southern section come before the commission in the future and and grateful for all the work that's been done to date. So thank you. Are there any further comments from commissioners? Hearing none, and we will please ask secretary to call the the role for the vote.

The motion was made by commissioner Stidham and seconded by vice chair Hewlett. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner Stidham? Yes. Commissioner Argo? Yes. Vice chair Hewlett? Yes. Chair Goodman?

Yes.

Commissioner Green?

Can I vote also for Paul who's not here and say yes twice?

To say yes then.

Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Yes. Commissioner Dixon? Yes. Commissioner Cash?

Yes.

Commissioner McGowan?

Thank

you. That motion has carried. Agenda item eight c is a request to preliminary site and building plans for the DC correctional treatment facility annex. And Stephanie Free is going to be making the presentation today. Welcome, Stephanie.

Hi. Yes. Thank you. Good afternoon, chair Goodman and commissioners. The district department of general services submitted preliminary site and building plans for a new correctional treatment facility or CTF annex located at 1900 Massachusetts Avenue in Southeast DC.

Overall, staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plans with comments to be addressed prior to the commission's final review. As a reminder, for the preliminary review stage, the commission is focused on topics such as the project's consistency with the federal elements of the comprehensive plan, the architectural and landscape strategy, the appropriateness of the site for the given context, and how the project will affect views and viewsheds. The CTF annex will be constructed within the DC Jail Complex along Massachusetts Avenue Southeast in an area known as Hill East. Hill East is a 67 acre former federal reservation located on the eastern edge of the Capitol Hill neighborhood, West of the Anacostia River. NCPC's Memorials and Museums Master Plan or two m plan identifies the terminus of Massachusetts Avenue at the Anacostia Waterfront as a potential future memorial site.

The location of the CTF Annex at a former federal reservation within the L'Enfant City, its frontage along the L'Enfant Street, which is Massachusetts Avenue, its proximity to Anacostia Park, and a potential memorial site are federal interests addressed in the federal elements of the comprehensive plan for the national capital. The district's master plan for Reservation 13, Hill East Waterfront, was approved by the district council in October 2002, entitled to this former federal reservation was transferred to the District of Columbia pursuant to the 2006 land transfer law. In September 2008, NCPC provided comments on the proposed text and map amendments for the Hill East Overlay District, which proposed a mixed use mixed income neighborhood. Redevelopment pursuant to the plan has begun mainly at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Nineteenth Street with a new development known as Park Kennedy. The existing correctional facility uses were intended to remain as part of the master plan and associated zoning amendments.

The district department of corrections currently operates and maintains the 450,000 square foot central detention facility or CDF, identified here as letters b and c, and the 450,000 square foot correctional treatment facility or CTF identified here as letter a. Collectively, the CDF and the CTF are commonly referred to as the DC jail. The existing CDF is almost 50 years old and has many operational and maintenance challenges, extreme wear and tear on the building, and outdated and aging infrastructure in need of costly repairs. The surrounding area features a mix of uses to the north of the project site across Massachusetts Avenue as the remaining portion of former Reservation 13 that is being redeveloped under the Hill East master plan. You can see the Park Kennedy development in the top photo on the left.

The bottom photo was taken near the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Nineteenth Street from this new development looking west at the existing jail complex. And here we have additional photos of the Park Kennedy development in the bottom row illustrating the scale and architectural typology of the developing Hill East area along Massachusetts Avenue. The top row of images shows the existing neighborhood to the west of the project site, which is primarily residential row homes within the R F 1 zone. Here, we have a look at the proposed annex and plan and perspective. The proposal includes demolishing the existing CDF administration building and constructing two new buildings along Massachusetts Avenue Southeast, which will be extended along the project's frontage.

The buildings will be connected by above grade walkways and below grade parking. The easternmost building, Building 1, will be five stories. The westernmost Building or Building 2 will be two stories, each with mechanical penthouses. Staff notes the proposed building the proposed height of Building 1 at 88 feet and Building 2 at 46 feet tall, each with a 20 foot height mechanic mechanical penthouse, comply with the nineteen ten Height of Buildings Act for properties with frontage along the 160 foot Massachusetts Avenue right of way. Building 1 will have a public entrance and lobby access from Massachusetts Avenue, medical clinic space and infirmary housing, intake space, transfer and release services, a visitation center, behavioral health facilities, office space for staff, space for resident educational programming, and resident housing.

The top three floors of Building 1 will be dedicated to housing and support spaces. Building 2 will primarily be used for housing and program support with both floors dedicated primarily to housing. There will also be educational programming space, staff support, and administrative offices on each floor. The project will be completed sequentially to minimize disruptions to DOC operations. First, Building 1 will be constructed on an existing surface parking lot located in front of the existing CTF as seen in the plan here on the right.

The eastern portion of the CDF will be demolished following completion of Building 1. This will allow some residents in the ancillary services located in the CDF to be moved to the newly completed Building 1. Building 2 will then be constructed. Once complete, the remaining residents in the CDF will be moved to Building 2. The applicant intends for construction to begin in fiscal year twenty twenty seven with Building 1 to be complete in fiscal year twenty thirty and Building 2 to be complete in fiscal year twenty thirty four.

In the next part of the presentation, I will provide an overview of the proposed building massing and design and the executive director's recommendations related to those elements, followed by a review of those related to the site plan and landscape design. And before I begin, I would just like to note that the building design received district zoning commission design review approval on March 17. The submission materials indicate the proposed architectural design is intended to create a strong, safe, and secure civic building that provides a place for residents to be healed with the intent to reduce recidivism. Inspired by natural elements and biophilic design, the project seeks to blur the function of the correctional facility with an exterior building facade that blends into the surrounding neighborhood and mitigates the location of this use with frontage on a primary street within the Hill East community. And here we have a three d model of the property with Building 1 massed in at 88 feet tall.

This condition relax reflects the first phase of development prior to the demolition of the CDF Administration Building and construction of Building 2. And here we have the ultimate condition with Building 2 masked into the model. You can see its 46 foot height here relative to Building 1 and the existing jail complex buildings as well as the height and mass of both buildings relative to the streetscape. In elevation, you can see a tiered courtyard between the two buildings and the walkway connection at the Second Floor. The facade materiality and coloring also becomes apparent.

Staff notes the building facade consists of a window wall with a combination of vision, semitransparent, and opaque glass panels layered with a perforated powder coated aluminum veil to provide variations in texture, transparency, color, and tone in the overall facade. This veil dissolves from the top of the building to the base of the building, working with the window wall to provide varying changes in texture, transparency, color, and tone in the overall facade. The veil is further defined by a series of horizontal leaves that act as disruptions in the facade and allow it to break down even further. There are approximately 20 of these horizontal leaves of varying length, distribution, and height proposed on the facades of the two buildings. However, staff finds the sequence, quantity, placement, and curvature of the proposed horizontal leaves in the facade appears to randomly interrupt the verticality of the metal veil and request the applicant reevaluate the purpose of these leaves and their appropriateness within the facade.

And here we have a couple more views of the building from the streetscape level. While staff finds the proposed renderings adequately demonstrate the building design and materials, visuals of the project shown in context of the adjacent Hilli's development would assist staff and the commission in evaluating the design along this L'Enfant Street. Therefore, staff requests additional renderings that illustrate longer views looking east and west on Massachusetts Avenue from Anacostia Park and Nineteenth Street to capture the proposed CTF annex in context of recently completed and future development on the north side of the street and to better understand how the proposed building will appear in context with the surroundings. I will conclude this section of the presentation by noting the project is designed to meet LEED standards with LEED standards, which will include new landscaping and stormwater management features that contribute to sustainable design. So now we will move on to an overview of the site plan and landscape design and the associated exec executive director's recommendations.

As I mentioned earlier, the project will extend the 160 foot Massachusetts Avenue right of way along the annex's frontage. A single curb cut circled here in yellow is proposed for a new private drive along the eastern side of Building 1. The private drive will connect to an internal road network within the jail complex, allowing staff access to below grade parking within the annex and resident transport. The project will also continue to utilize the existing private drive on the western side of the site. Visitors will utilize the Building 1 public entrance and lobby for Massachusetts Avenue.

Released residents will exit the building from from Building 1 onto the Massachusetts Avenue sidewalk. Both private drives will be gated to restrict access from the public. The submission includes a site control diagram seen here that indicates the entire DC Jail complex has a secure perimeter with site control features that overlap the secure perimeter in some places and extend beyond the perimeter in others, such as with the tiered planter walls adjacent to the sidewalk on Massachusetts Avenue at Building 2. Staff as such, staff requests elevation drawings, precedent photographs, and a written description of the site control features as they relate to the streetscape on Massachusetts Avenue and their impact on the visual quality of the public realm. All streetscape improvements within the public right of way will require approval by the district's public space committee.

The project proposes improvements along the 160 foot Massachusetts Avenue right of way, including street trees, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and building yard planters with landscaping. On the southern side of the right of way, adjacent to the CTF Annex, the public space will incorporate approximately 32 feet of landscaping directly adjacent to the proposed buildings and tiered planters. The submission indicates the proposed landscape plan serves as a serves a dual purpose by contributing to the feeling of Massachusetts Avenue as a grand boulevard while simultaneously softening the building as it meets the public environment. The building yard landscape is made up of berms, retaining walls, and extensive plantings of various heights. Here, we have enlargement plans and sections of the Massachusetts Avenue streetscape improvements in front of both Buildings 1 And 2.

And overall, staff finds the building massing and tiered planters that transition the facades and topography to the public streetscape create a strong street wall along Massachusetts Avenue, which will reinforce the vista of this L'Enfant Street and enhance the pedestrian experience, ultimately linking the Anacostia River to the Hill East neighborhood. A large open space is created between the existing CDF and Building 2, which is circled here in yellow, offering views into the jail DC Jail Complex from Massachusetts Avenue. The plans also show an interruption in the street trees and streetscape plantings at this location with the sidewalk directly abutting the property line. The applicant indicated the program of the open space here has not yet been determined as the use of the remaining portion of the CDF will be determined by the district in the future. For the interim condition, staff suggests the applicant continue the street trees and landscape treatment along the entirety of the open space between Building 2 and the existing CDF to reinforce the streetscape, limit views into the campus, and screen views of the existing buildings and site control features from Massachusetts Avenue.

And while the planting palette includes native species, it also proposes some plant species that are recognized as invasive in the National Capital Region, such as heavenly bamboo and double file viburnum. Therefore, staff recommends the applicant replace any plant species recognized as invasive in the National Capital Region on the plant list with regionally native alternatives that support pollinator habitats consistent with the recommendations of NCPC's pollinators best practices resource guide. The executive director's recommendations are listed here as well as the staff report and have been incorporated into my presentation. So this concludes my presentation. Myself and several others, from the applicant team are on the line and available to answer your questions.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Stephanie and team. Commissioners online or in person have a question right now. Yes.

Is there a programmatic reason that's driving the disparity in the heights? Like, it seems quite marked between, the two buildings. Is there some reason for that?

Sure. I think that is, the square footage needed to accommodate the program, but I think that the applicant could provide a bit more clarity on that.

Yeah. Like, if you could make them the same height or, you know Mhmm.

Shift it. Just curious. Okay. Thank you.

Mhmm.

Question. Yes.

Actually, I'd

like to drill down on that because that was my primary question. So so we're getting so the CDF, which just so folks know, that's general population. That's the part that's, like, really falling down and bad right now. That's eventually all gonna go away, But it seems like we're not using it seems like we're not using the full height that we could be getting for that smaller building. So why aren't we future proofing this now and building two buildings that are up to a height that can accommodate the future uses since we're actually gonna be getting rid of all that old CDF? Is this just because of budgetary reasons, or is there there's something else driving it?

Sure. Is someone from the applicant team, available on the line to answer that question?

Good afternoon, Meredith. Am I frozen? No. I think I froze for a second. I'm sorry.

Good afternoon, Meredith Moldenhauer, land use counsel from Cozon O'Connor. I think one of the height reduction, or our increase in height also is consistent with the Hilli's master plan for intending to have lower density towards the residential community and then have an increase in height as it as you approach the Anacostia River creating the master boulevard appearance. I think that was one intent as well as the overall intent to satisfy the programmatic requirements and needs of the jail and the current population, but not to overbuild. And I can also turn over to one of our design team or the deputy director, Michelle Wilson, to answer that as well.

Good afternoon. My name is Michelle Wilson. I'm the Deputy Director of Administration. I hope you can all hear me at DOC. I think a lot of our primary considerations were to ensure that especially as we build into Building 1, a lot of the community feedback we received was to be able to move as many people from the central detention facility or PDF.

I believe that's one of the commissioners had stated was to move as many people from PDF as possible. So we added there were some additional floors added to Building 1 to ensure that we will be able to have some general population housing units within the first phase of the new design in the Annex Building. Thank you. Does that answer your question?

Yeah. Think that also more to say, but I

think that answers the question.

Okay. Thank you, commissioner Cash and team. Any further questions? No. No. Hearing no further questions. We have one person here today who has signed up to speak, and that is Samaya Lane, who's attending in person. And, Samaya, you will have three minutes to provide your testimony. Please let us know when you're ready, and thank you for coming.

Thank you. My name is Smaya Lane, and I'm a Ward 7 resident. I'm also a former nurse that used to that used to work at the CTF and CDF facilities. And so, I'm also a former nurse former nurse educator at St. Elizabeth's Hospital.

So in both these facilities, it behooved me to come and testify because I actually worked at these facilities. And I wanna say that Saint Elizabeth's I don't wanna spend too much time, but I wanna just tell you my reason why I was here. No one took it I don't think anyone took into consideration the people that worked at these facilities in order to make a conducive design for people to carry out their their work. So with that in mind, I just want to say that during the presentation, heard a lot about the design, but nothing about the the the interior design and how to facilitate the correctional officers, doctors, and other personnel to properly, house and go about day to day correction of the of the inmates. I want to really talk about women and how the women are separated in the DC jail.

When I was a nurse at the DC jail, the section for the women was abhorrent. It was dirty, flaky. It was far worse than the men. I just wanted to to say that I was actually so I'm hoping that this commission will hear me and do something about planning something for the women. Women have unique and different pathways into the criminal justice system as related to men and require different services responses.

In 2016, the Washington Lawyers Committee prepared a white paper regarding on the challenges that the DC Department of Corrections faced with confinement of women, such as maintaining contact with their children and families, medical care, education, job training, sexual abuse, and reentry into society. There were 11 recommendations. However, the one that I really want to concentrate on is to expand opportunities for incarcerated mothers to live with their newborns. We talk about the crime. We wanna lock up people and think that that is the answer to things.

The actual root of the problem is that our children are not being bonded with their they have no bonding with their parents. And so what happens is you have a cycle of women getting locked up, and we have an increase in women being locked up. You they're pregnant, they have children, and they lose custody of their children. They're fine. Okay. But I would just thank you for my presentation, and I hope that this commission will consider facilities to facilitate women and children bonding together.

Thank you very much, Smaya. We really appreciate that, you know, testimony from real life experience, and feel free to send your comments to the staff to include. And if anybody wants to have if anybody has any questions,

I would like to stay and answer to

Well, there that's that is next. Are there any questions for the witness from the commission? So we're not finished with you yet. Thank you. And yes.

I wanna thank you for your work that you did at Saint Elizabeth's. Yeah. Because I won't go into the history of my Saint Elizabeth. I haven't been there, but I used to jump on. I used to I used to maybe I should have, but I I used to I used to break through a fence and go chase rabbits on your lawn when you were punctual. That was our Thanksgiving effort to get some extra food in the house. It wasn't that bad. But, anyhow but thank you for your service. Okay? I also would like to to have you explain to us some of the things you think need to be tweaked to make the layouts and things work for you better.

And you in Saint Louis or this this

Yeah. Wait. Where you where you where you want us to share ideas?

Well, for Saint Elizabeth, the nursing stations were so small. You you could you had to almost just stand up, and you couldn't even hardly do your your notes. You weren't comfortable. And, I thought that that was extremely poor planning in the in the new hospital. No one took into consideration work conditions of these nurses that have to extend themselves to these patients. It is a lot dealing with the patients.

Yep.

And so when you have uncomfortable nursing stations, you know, where you you can't

even

hardly bend to, you know, to do your notes or anything, and so the same thing might be transferred over to this new jail. When I was there, at the nursing station, it it just was just, to me, not conducive. And so I I know that there was some vacant vacant space that was going to be available, and I'd like to make a suggestion if you could take that vacant space and make cottages for women and children to be able to stay together. These children did not commit a crime. They didn't commit a crime.

And so they deserve to at least have bonding with their mothers.

So you don't know of any outreach to nurses or others to give ideas to this plan as far as you know?

There I I would would imagine that if they were invited, you know, to come. It's just that I guess, I used to be a real estate agent also before I was a nurse. So I just took the interest and and and know that you have planning. And in order to to get what you want, you have to stand up and have your voice heard.

Well, you have to be given a chance to stand up

and place given a chance to stand up.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

Thank you. And are there any other questions? I think vice chair Hewitt? Yeah.

First of thank you, commissioner Dixon. Thank you, miss Lane, for for coming here and presenting today, and thank you, commissioner Dixon, for for your concern as well. It it seems to me there there are folks listening, and you have the district department of general services and everyone's listening. If we can point her in the the right direction for for her to give her to provide an opportunity for her to be heard in a wider venue, that would she's got some very good points, and I'd love for for them to be heard. So if we can point her in the right direction or if anyone else from the district has any advice, that would be appreciated.

Michelle Wilson from DC Department of Corrections.

I I am very sorry. I had to speak up because I really can't hear you. I didn't hear hear you before the first time, to tell you the truth.

I apologize. I'm not speak can you hear me now?

Barely. Barely. Not much better.

Hold on. Let me check my audio. Can you hear me now?

It's about the same voice.

Maybe if you could raise the volume of your voice because it's about the same. It's pretty quiet. Not your voice, but the the sound we're receiving.

Can you hear me now?

Little better. Yeah.

No one has ever told me I talk too softly. That's why I I I would I I apologize that you weren't able to hear me before. I hope you can hear me now. I, I'm happy to talk to miss Lane. I I think that the District of Columbia Department of Corrections that she knew, when she worked here will be she will see that it's it's very different from the experience that she had.

We, for instance, we do not house women at the central detention facility any longer. They are all at the correctional treatment facility. But we are happy to talk to her. We've got a number of policy updates and and other things that I think we'll could address and do address a number of the concerns she's raised. So I encourage her to to reach out to me. My email is michelleperiodbolton@dc.gov, and I can place it in the chat as well. And I'd be happy to talk to her further.

And, miss Free, can we provide that information too.

Yes. Yeah.

Okay. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate it. And it's good to it's good to hear from you. Thank you. Are there any other questions for our presenters today and our testimonial?

Actually, I've got one more. I was gonna Okay. Wait for a comment, but I do legitimately have a question. So on the slide in our packet, it's called design precedence. It's like it looks like a bunch of trees inside a mall and a waterfall and all that. I I'm not getting this at all. So don't know if anyone from the design team can speak to this because all we've seen so far is the facade of a building and the massing. And, like, all this stuff, one of it looks like the Australian embassy. I I I'm just confused. Maybe someone put some context around what we're looking at because some of these things seem like interior features. I'm not getting that translated to the to what we have for us.

Can anyone answer that question?

Are there architects from CORE? Can I walk through that?

Yes. Hi. Dave Cheney, partner at CORE Architecture and Design. We designed the facade of the building. So I think what you're referring to are impressive images, which we're trying to use to evoke the different programmatic requirements make the building kind of fit within the context and also soften it at the street edge and then also just blur it a little bit.

So we use those those images not as explicit representations of the facade, but as references to try and get the the embodiment of those of those feelings of those materials and looks and feels into the facade itself. So they're not specifically to have those elements on it, but to invoke the the feeling that the facade is falling over the edge of the parapet and broken by the horizontal leaves to give it that sort of, again, the the character of the the filter and the light and the shadow and the play of the color and the materiality that way.

I think you're referring to something different, aren't you, or no?

So, yeah, it's it's in the the packet. In our packet, it's page 24 and what was online. But I I I appreciate that. I mean, I see that a lot in these different designs. Like like I said, one of them looked like it was a bunch of trees inside. Yeah. So I'll I'll take it as that's why I'm not a designer. I'm in government. So, so I I appreciate the feedback.

Okay.

Okay. Any other questions? Hearing none again, thank you to everyone who came today. Thank you very much for coming and for presenting. Thanks. So now is there a motion to approve the preliminary site and building plans for the DC correctional treatment facility annex. So moved, madam chair. It's been moved by vice chair Hewlett. Is there a second? Second. Second by commissioner It's now open to the commission for discussion, and I'm gonna begin with commissioner Cozer.

So I I also appreciated having miss Lane's comments to give some greater kind of lived experience to this given that the commission's purview on this is quite narrow. It's really helpful to have additional context. So appreciate that very much, and appreciate the offer from department of general services to have conversation and share some of that of of her experience and lend that to the design. With with that, appreciate the applicant's work and appreciate our staff's work on this as well. No further comments.

Thank you, commissioner Kozar. Commissioner Stidham.

So I had the benefit of I saw this during my seat in the zoning commission as well. And I think that something that probably didn't ring through in in this presentation is the intentionality not only of the landscaping, but also of the building facade in the actual interior functions of the building. In out the that, tiered planter, is not only a great outside asset, but it allows for windows at that level without people looking in to the facility where either residents or people are working so that it provides that light that you really need as part of a building, but it gives that setback to give the privacy that is needed for the facility to take place. And the facade too, I'm I'm not a great fan of this facade. I think I said that before.

But the reason that it exists, I think, is essential to the function of this building, and this is not your typical jail facility. I mean, this is in a very, sort of residential place. It's gonna be significant. You can't hide something like this, but you can make it so that the people who use that building, it's a livable, workable space. And and I think the facade gives that. It gives that privacy. It gives that look inside. But to our speaker, thank you very much. I think the intentionality that has occurred on the outside should carry through on the inside as well. And I know that it's only we saw some of that.

Not being of that world, I think it's important that you do carefully consider how those interior spaces work, to ensure that it is successful. But I do I do appreciate the design of the building, and I look forward to seeing more of this. I think that you've made a lot of really good changes from your time at CFA. I would, you know, continue to consider and refine. Not a great fan of the horizontal bar. It it does sort of interrupt the flow, and maybe it's the color and the combination. I think I said this before. But, anyway, I I think that's it.

Well, thank you. Thank you very much. We appreciate your comments, commissioner Stidham. So we are now, at commissioner Argo. Me. I know. I appreciate especially appreciate your comments. Mhmm. And I don't I don't have any additional comments. This has been it's it's been very illustrative.

Yeah. And, I mean, I'm interested in how it moves forward. But appreciate all the, thought that's gone into it and and especially your comments, which I think are very useful. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you very much, commissioner Argo. Vice chair Hewlett.

Yes. First, I'd like to thank miss Fried for her presentation. I'd like like to thank miss Lane. Thank miss Lane for taking the time to come down here. Mhmm.

And thank you all for working with her, pointing her in the right direction to share her additional comments. Commissioner Cash made a good point about why aren't we preparing for the future here, because we've already heard that there's an increase. So that's a point that that we should keep in mind as and and they should keep in mind as we continue to move forward. I'd like to associate my comments and adopt the comments of of commissioner, is Kozart. And but I also appreciate the comments of commissioner Stidham explaining, about the light.

I did that thought hadn't occurred to me. So thank you for, enlightening us on that. So that was it for me.

Thank you, vice chair Hewlett. Commissioner Greene. Thank you

very much. One of things that I think is interesting about this design that I've is, you know, traditional jails are solid impenetrable buildings. You can't see in. You can't see out. The person's removed from society. They do their time. They leave. But there's no connection to the community around. It's separate a it's an other. And the person who goes in is an other. And and one of the nice things about transparency is that emphasizes the connection to community. You know, people make mistakes, but people aren't mistakes. They're gonna come out. They're gonna rejoin community. That's I I you know, it's not just good design.

It's a good metaphor. And but what I struggle a bit with here is the use of that veil. Because the veil obscures a pretty high percentage of the elevation, and it's not in regular blocks. So it doesn't allow the user to to simply shift and see and then shift back and not see. And and I wonder what's happening with that.

It's almost as if you're sort of teasing folks with the view of the outside, but but not really quite allowing them to see beyond that. And I I'm I'm not sure how to resolve that. And and I also don't know what happens to the quality of light within the building. So when you have light coming through the screen wall, are we getting heavily shadowed spaces, heavily modeled spaces inside for the users to have to contend with. And just thinking about with Lane, you know, is this gonna create situations for staff and nurses where you don't have predictable light, where you're moving in and out of shadow, you're moving in and out of view planes.

And so I'm not quite sure what to make of that. And I'd I'd would very much like to know more about it because I it it it at present, it doesn't work terribly well for me as do the the the horizontal fins are really adding nothing to it. They're really working against the patterning without providing you normally would see those to provide some, solar shading for large window openings or doors, and and they just is at present, they just appear sort of random. But I'm I'm struggling a little bit with that clash between transparency and then the the pattern of that veil and and and what exactly that means for folks inside. So thank you.

Thank you, commissioner Greens. Commissioner Tunstall Williams.

Always a blessing and a curse to go after you. Covered a lot, and I I really do agree with one of the things that I think the design does well, whether we like the veil or not, is that it doesn't feel like a fortress, and it doesn't Yeah. It feels like it could be any sort of feature in the community. I think that the landscape and the way you've handled what I'm sure are security concerns, really make for a streetscape environment as opposed to feeling like you're I'm trying to separate this facility from the rest of the community. So I think that's very good.

One one thing, this is on me, I'm not hugely familiar with the current development in Hill East. So I would love to see some more, and I will go over there before we look at this again, contextual views to see how the building fits in. The massing did strike me as a little bit odd. I understand based on what you said about trying to step down closer to the residence. In my head, it seemed like it should have gone the other way, but, again, that's my infamiliarity with the neighborhood.

I kinda felt differently about the the the veil and the facade. I I was kinda struck that it seemed like it would be a very light filled building, which seems very different from when you think of a punched opening, little tiny opening for a correctional facility. So I I think it has great promise, and I I don't disagree that maybe we need to know a little bit more about what that veil looks like. I mean, it could be as transparent as what we see at the, African American museum. It it could have some quality like that.

So I think there's a lot of development there. I think it does have promise. The horizontal bars, I could take them or leave them. They do seem arbitrary maybe. And so maybe looking at ways to particularly based on, miss Lane's comments, are there ways to provide relief and maybe additional transparency for nurse stations or whatever programming is appropriate to have a more external, view in in locations, and those are tied with the the horizontal beams as a way to break down that massing. But I think for a preliminary design, I I think it is pay it's great quite promising. And I think, you've done a great job sort of integrating it into what could be a broader community and not feeling like a separate piece.

That's all. Thank you very much, commissioner Tunstall Williams. Commissioner Dixon.

I think all the comments about the building, appreciate. I'm really more concerned about the people and how they're gonna be treated inside. And I think that's why the nurses' presentation was very important. And, hopefully, we will be brought into play so we can make sure that folks who are helping and taking care of these patients have a situation that makes them more productive. I'm also kinda you know, I'm troubled because I was the guy who helped put the legislation together to deinstitutionalize, which was very progressive at that time, assuming that we'd have all kinds of social services out there to support people.

Well, guess what? They weren't there. And now we got a lot of people on the streets and in this facility who are not criminals, but who have other challenges that need to be dealt with that are not being done within the proper environment. If we can act this environment more appropriately functional, maybe we can help deal with those issues more effectively, and treat these people as the humans they are for future productive service. So that's my point. I'm glad to see us moving forward, but let's focus on what's going on with the folks inside. It's just not a building. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, commissioner Dixon. Commissioner Cash.

Thanks. So, yeah, as far as the the horizontal fins, I'm just not really getting it, but, that's kind of all I really have to say about the design. I wanna go back to which is somewhat operational. I think this gets to miss Lane's testimony. We need space for both. We need like, people are housed here sometimes for several months to years, but we also have all the support staff that are gonna be there, all the nurses, all the guards, everyone else. They need enough room to be able to operate at current levels or if not more. Because right now, one of the biggest problems is not only that the CDF is decrepit, we need more beds, and there's overcrowding. So I feel like we're throwing away an opportunity here to build both buildings up to that same height envelope because one of two things is gonna happen with the leftovers of the CDF building. Either it's gonna continue to be CDF overflow or something like that.

It's gonna sit there on the corner, and it's gonna be taller. You got this one spit sandwich down, smooshed down building in between two taller ones, or eventually, we're gonna sell the CDF off to developers, and someone's gonna develop up to the maximum they can with height and and all density. So I think you'd I know that the costs and and the budget process that we're in right now are really tough. I mean, this is everything that comes before this commission with the cities eventually seems like it gets value engineered down anyway. If we could just get the height and even not build out the space, but have the height and and the capacity for the future, I think that we'd be missing a big opportunity if we're not building this up to the development potential that we can because we already got lucky that we have space for these new CDF facilities because we got reservation 13.

But if if we miss this opportunity, I'm just afraid that we could be right back here in fifteen years after it's built and have the same overcrowding because we didn't think to build up a little bit more. So, that's really my only comments.

Thank you very much, commissioner Cash. And I just wanna say that perhaps, you know, we could go around again, but we won't. But the primary focus, I think, for this applicant, first of all, thanks for bringing it, you know, to our commission. But the primary focus is how the building relates to Massachusetts Avenue as a L'Enfant Street. But having said that, I think we've touched on the height of the building, the profile, the, you know, the architecture, etcetera.

I too am most compelled by our guest presentation, miss Lane, because we do care about, how architecture and how buildings relate to the federal plan. We also care about the people inside and the work that has to go on there. So I think it's been a really very robust discussion by the commission, and I think that's a good thing. And I would just reflect all the comments that have been made before. I only worry about those horizontal things for birds.

That's my concern. But I won't talk about that because that can become a real mess on a building to clean. That's my experience from, my father who was an engineer. But, anyway, I I do think that the building is attractive. I do like the idea of the transparency, the light, the integration into the neighborhood. It feels like, a a good space. I'm less concerned, I guess, about the height of the two buildings because I think sometimes variety is is normal on on the streets. You know, height is but having said that, I am far from an architect. But I do, like the design, and I do think that this functionality question is something that touches all of us. And just glad we shared that with you.

And with that, hearing no further comment, I I will ask that the, secretary confirm the motion and the second take the vote.

Yes. The motion was made by vice chair Hewlett and seconded by commissioner Argo. Commissioner Cozart? Yes. Commissioner Stidham? Yes. Commissioner Argo? Yes. Vice chair Hewlett?

Yes.

Chair Goodman? Yes. Commissioner Green?

Yes.

Commissioner Tunstall Williams? Yes. Commissioner Dixon?

Yes.

Commissioner Cash?

Yes.

Commissioner McGowan?

Very good. The motion passes. Okay. Then I think we have finished. Are there any further questions or comments today? Hearing none, I just again want to wish vice chair Hewlett a happy birthday, and I hope that she is able to celebrate later. And thank you to all the presenters today. This has been a a good day of presentations and good conversation. This concludes our open session agenda. Our next regular meeting will be Thursday, May 1, May, at 1PM. If there's no further business, this meeting stands adjourned.