7/31/2019 Wharf Resolution
1/1
A motion regarding ANC-6D and The Wharf Phase 1-Stage 2 PUD
Zoning Application
On Friday, June 8, 72 hours prior to the meeting at which we
were to vote on this application,ANC-6D Commissioners received a
large packet of materials from the applicant responding to aportion
of the concerns weve raised, in some cases as long as one year ago.
ANC-6Dfinds thatthere is insufficient time to analyze, let alone
address and follow up with applicant on their
responses to some of these long-standing concerns among which
include:
A written bus management plan; a written construction management
plan; a written constructiontimetable, a written landscape and
amorist plan, a written operations plan for The Wharf Center,a
written plan to address how applicant intends to move 6,000 people
in and out of The WharfCenter when it is at peak use. a written
plan to address pedestrian access from BannekerOverlook, the
National Mall, and LEnfant Plaza Metro, a. written response
relating to the useremaining parking structures and newly created
open lots during construction and interim use, awritten
recreational water sports plan assuring direct use and access by
personal portablewatercraft, written update on negotiations
incorporating DC Sail within the development, awritten plan
memorializing what has been agreed to with DC Heritage, and a
written historicalmarker plan.
ANC 6D also finds unacceptable the manner in which the applicant
(the future owner of theproperly) and DMPED (the current owner of
the property) have delayed meaningful discussionswith the 94
Gangplank Marina residents on a range of issues, preventing open,
clear andhonest communications. For more than two years, the 94
residents have sought positive andmutually beneficial resolutions
of pending issues to little avail and in contravention of the
longstanding intent of three mayoral administrations, the Phase
One, Stage One PUD, itself and theintention of the Southwest
Community to maintain a functioning, viable liveaboard
communitywithin the redeveloped Waterfront. The applicant has
stated that they "intend" to do much. Butthe devil is in the
details and It is the details that we're having a devil of a time
getting theapplicant to address. ANC-6D suggests that the Zoning
Commission subject the applicant togreater accountability in the
manner in which they pursue discussions with the 94 slip
holders,
the only residents living within the defined area of the
PUD.
ANC-6D has a number of specific concerns that will be addressed
in our report and in testimonybefore the Zoning Commission. These
include, but are not limited to, the manner in which theproject
relates to the North, changes to traffic concerns based upon a
pending decision by theArmy Corps of Engineers and the formal DDOT
response, discussion about where the Kastlesstadium may reside and
any and all issues relating to Parcel 11 and the Waterfront Park,
whichwill be addressed at our July 9 ANC meeting.
Therefore, ANC-6D does not endorse the PUD at this time. We
remain open to discussions withthe applicant for the purposes of
ameliorating our concerns. At a regularly scheduled meeting,at
which a quorum was present and by a vote of __ to __, this motion
was approved on June 11,
2012.
Andy LitskyChairman, ANC-6D
