[Mintwood-place] parking & alleys on Mintwood

Sat Jul 31 06:29:38 EDT 2010

" One does wonder, though, why such a generous exemption from the parking
rules is available for such a large number of units when the only part of
the building being preserved is the facade and the 2 side walls. It's a
little perverse that it is the historic preservation rules that may make it
possible for this developer to add another 10-15 vehicles to neighborhood
streets."

Cynthia, as to your quote above, let's be mindful that the DC Historic
Preservation Office is part of the Office of Planning, which is overseen by
the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, thus we get these
developer-friendly results such as 13 living spaces in what had been two
single family homes, or, on a grander scale, the permission that Lowe
Enterprises received to build a condo tower in the Hilton Washington
courtyard that would obscure the view of half of what the HPRB had just
"Landmarked". That Lowe is not proceeding with the condo part of their
development at this time is a sign of the economic times.

  _____  

From: mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org
[mailto:mintwood-place-bounces at lists.mutualaid.org] On Behalf Of Cynthia
Pols
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 9:46 PM
To: matt forman
Cc: mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] parking & alleys on Mintwood

Matt - The exception is not for buildings located in "historic districts"
but rather for historic buildings or structures ("historic resource").
1852-54 would have to be certified by the state historic preservation office
as "contributing to the character of the historic district"  in order to to
classified as an "historic resource" and to qualify for the exception:

2120.2           For the purposes of this section, a historic resource is a
building or structure listed in the District of Columbia Inventory of
Historic Sites or a building or structure certified in writing by the State
Historic Preservation Officer as contributing to the character of the
historic district in which it is located.

The policy is as you surmise (" The Board of Zoning Adjustment may grant
relief from all or part of the parking requirements of this section if the
owner of the property demonstrates that, as a result of the nature or
location of the historic resource, providing the required parking will
result in significant architectural or structural difficulty in maintaining
the historic integrity and appearance of the historic resource") so the
question is whether 1852-1854 could be certified by the historic
preservation officer.  

The answer is probably yes since virtually all the buildings in the area
were deemed to contribute to the character of the historic district in the
1987 registration form for the Kalorama Triangle Historic District. One does
wonder, though, why such a generous exemption from the parking rules is
available for such a large number of units when the only part of the
building being preserved is the facade and the 2 side walls. It's a little
perverse that it is the historic preservation rules that may make it
possible for this developer to add another 10-15 vehicles to neighborhood
streets.

--Cynthia

On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:17 PM, matt forman wrote:

The portion of the Little estate that is now Mintwood Place was sold to
Lawrence Sands, who was apparently the husband of John Little's daughter,
Margaret Little Sands.  In 1884, Sands subdivided that parcel into the
street itself and lots with no alleys. The lots he created on the south side
of Mintwood immediately abutted the remaining Little estate that is now the
park.  I can only guess that the developer of the land north of the Mintwood
lots (now Biltmore) decided to dedicate a portion of his subdivision to
alley use to benefit the lots he was creating, which incidentally benefitted
the north side Mintwood lots who would not have otherwise had an alley. 

As to parking, see www.dcoz.dc.gov, chapter 21.  The parking requirement is
not limited to dwelling units. Many zoning uses require parking, including
inns, retail, schools, churches, etc., so the inn may have had an waiver.
But the addition of dwelling units does impose a parking requirement again.
However, there is an exception permitted for historic districts.
Presumably, the policy is that requiring parking might necessitate the
altering of historic buildings, and that historic preservation outweighs
parking. 

----- Original Message -----

From: John <mailto:john.cloud666 at yahoo.com>  Cloud

To: Denis James <mailto:denisjames at verizon.net>  ;
mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org

Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 2:59 PM

Subject: Re: [Mintwood-place] some info on 1852-54 Mintwood project

Denis/Cynthia:

I'm just curious about the "parking waiver for 7 parking spaces". I would
guess that long ago there was an alley or street behind Mintwood, since
otherwise that whole line of townhouses would have lacked back
access/tradesmen's entrances, etc.Presumably the alley "went away" in
conjuction with establishing Kalorama Park? (Any idea, Kalorama Park
historian-types?) By that federal/District action, does that mean that all
the other houses on that side of Mintwood without parking also have waivers
for parking spaces?  Or does that rule/waiver of the rule apply only to new
construction?

  _____  

From: Denis James <denisjames at verizon.net>
To: mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
Sent: Fri, July 30, 2010 2:00:08 PM
Subject: [Mintwood-place] some info on 1852-54 Mintwood project

Three members of the Kalorama Citizens Association Executive Committee (VP
and Mintwood resident Bob Ellsworth, Treasurer Ted Guthrie and myself)
visited the DC Historic Preservation Office yesterday and met with
Architectural Historian Anne Brockett (if you have questions, contact her
at: anne.brockett at dc.gov or (202) 442-8842) to view the plans for this
project, which is located within the Kalorama Triangle Historic District.

We learned the following that may be of interest to neighbors:

It is a matter of right project and has already been approved by the DC
Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB);

There will be 13 condo units built;

Though the developer will remove rear additions and then build on in the
rear and add a partial new fourth story setback from the front so as not to
be visible from the street, the building will still fall within the 60% lot
occupancy requirement;

The floor area ratio (FAR) does not exceed that allowed by the zoning of
Mintwood Place;

The developer has asked the Zoning Administrator for a parking waver for 7
parking spaces. Zoning regs require there to be one off-street space for
every two dwelling units constructed. As there is no public alley on that
side of Mintwood, the other row-houses essentially have the same "right" of
not having to provide parking on their lots;

The new portions of construction in the rear will have a brick veneer;

The basements will be dug out to provide more headroom. This will require
underpinning. The developer is obligated to inform neighbors with shared
party walls of this element of the construction.

Denis James

KCA President

(202) 232-8829

  _____  

_______________________________________________
Mintwood-place mailing list
Mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/mintwood-place

_______________________________________________
Mintwood-place mailing list
Mintwood-place at lists.mutualaid.org
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/mintwood-place

Cynthia M. Pols

1862 Mintwood Place, NW - # 304

Washington, DC  20009

202-328-0654

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mutualaid.org/pipermail/mintwood-place/attachments/20100731/b14084a0/attachment-0001.html>