Add me to the map. I think a lot of folks who are in the "mushy middle" don't understand the implications. They love Barracks Row. They love the changes that have come about on H Street. But they want to "rightsize Hine". Of course, if they'd succeeded in "rightsizing H Street" or Barracks Row, we'd be living in Vienna, VA rather than what's becoming a world-class city.

by oboe on Jun 1, 2012 2:16 pm • link • report

Added my letter - another Hill resident. I've found the whole 'Right-size Hines' slogan to be a bit flawed - I personally agree that it should be 'right-sized', but I suspect that my idea of 'right-sized' is quite opposite of what the folks with the signs think.

by Joshua on Jun 1, 2012 2:27 pm • link • report

@Joshua - couldn't have said it better. The Hine project already was the right size. It's been chopped up twice thus far.

by Dave on Jun 1, 2012 2:36 pm • link • report

What Joshua said:

hill resident
added my letter
"right size" is doublespeak.

by Lucre on Jun 1, 2012 2:40 pm • link • report

The Hine detractors excel at making false statements. I suppose it's all some hyperbolic attempt to be heard. They are harrassing people at the market to sign their petition and criticizing those of us who choose not to sign it.

by MJ on Jun 1, 2012 2:41 pm • link • report

Sent my letter. Enough is enough.

by BFM on Jun 1, 2012 2:46 pm • link • report

The "right size Hine" slogan drives me crazy. It creates a false dichotomy and assumes that everyone who supports the project wants to "wrong size" it. This is compelling only if you are persuaded by fallacious logic.

by Rob P on Jun 1, 2012 2:57 pm • link • report

If anything, a "right-sized" Hine would be *bigger.* Stanton-Eastbanc has already a lot of concessions, in an effort to appease the opposition.

by Paulus on Jun 1, 2012 3:01 pm • link • report

I live 2 blocks away and i support it..and I know others as well. Emailed tommy and the ANC

by beatbox on Jun 1, 2012 3:03 pm • link • report

I'd be curious to see a distribution of the people who are against the project. I live 6 blocks away and filled out the form so will expect to see myself there.

by Simon on Jun 1, 2012 3:03 pm • link • report

Brian Pate is pretty much my neighbor...although I don't really know him, my fiance is friendly with him, so I will speak to him about this the first chance I get.

by MM on Jun 1, 2012 3:29 pm • link • report

By the way, doesn't this seem like a better place for a flea market than north of Hine? http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/2785/capitol-hill-town-square-team-presents-options/

by Lucre on Jun 1, 2012 3:30 pm • link • report

I'm six blocks away, but I go over there at least twice a week.

I think the building should be taller, but I'll give that up if it is at least pretty (if not beautiful) and there absolutely is a guarantee to maintain the current size of the flea market. The guarantee can come from the government in the form of assured space in closed streets or EM Metro plaza.

But instead the neighborhood will focus on height and keeping the flea market off the streets and plaza.

by mcc on Jun 1, 2012 3:37 pm • link • report

I'm a Hill resident and just sent my letter of support. There's so much NIMBY silliness around here, it's crazy. I overheard one person saying the Hine project would block out the sun; another suggested turning the whole site into a farm to combat the urban food desert. At Eastern Market.

On the other hand, has anyone else seen the handwritten signs that call for including more affordable housing at the Hine site? There are several attached to poles, etc. on my walk home from the Metro.

by MP on Jun 1, 2012 3:43 pm • link • report

Two questions.

1) can one support the development as is and still press the developers to fulfill the original obligation they made to the flea market, which they spent the last year walking away from sideways, while trying to blame it on Right Size Hine?

2) Were all 30 of these residential addresses, or some of them business addresses (realty offices and tenants of the developers were the ones that I heard bandied)?

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 1, 2012 3:46 pm • link • report

Were all 30 of these residential addresses, or some of them business addresses (realty offices and tenants of the developers were the ones that I heard bandied)?

Come off it already. The whole idea that one would have to be a real estate office in order to be in favor of denser development at the site is ridiculous, and utterly undermines you opposition.

"I heard bandied" about that Right Size Hine is actually an astroturf group whose strings are being pulled by the Big 3 Automakers in a last-ditch effort to protect cheap and easy street parking. After all, since I disagree, no individual human being can possibly hold such views.

by oboe on Jun 1, 2012 3:57 pm • link • report

@ oboe You assume I don't support the Hine proposal? I do. I collected signatures supporting the Hine developers before the HPRB hearing last year. Real ones without a business skin in the game. If it's a BS allegation this time re realty and tenants, I'd like to see it knocked down, which is why I asked. (Another realtor brought it up to me.) But seriously, the developers walked away from dealing with the flea market community, so let's press them on that. The fleas will be fine if they get something more substantial than a pat on the head and "we'll work on it, we promise" but "it's not our responsibility" when it comes to zoning later this month.

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 1, 2012 4:27 pm • link • report

Read Scott Martin: Looking at them, they all look residential. One was on Pennsylvania Ave, but I just Googled it and it's a condo building, not a retail or office building. One is on 7th, but also on a residential block of 7th, not the commercial blocks near Eastern Market.

I don't know all the addresses of every random business on every block of the Hill, but none of them look like they're on any of the commercial streets as far as I can see.

by David Alpert on Jun 1, 2012 4:32 pm • link • report

@readscottmartin - what are you suggesting eastbank do with the fleas - shrink their building to accommodate a couple extra tents? If the flea market is a priority with the community why can't stakeholders extend it down 7th or EM plaza? What is your suggestion - its unclear.

by jdollop on Jun 1, 2012 4:42 pm • link • report

@ Dave, Thanks for clearing that up. The communications piece is so effed up and opaque (on both sides), the principle of a dense enough transit-oriented development is all that one can glom onto in order to support this thing. That, and taking care of the more innocent of the bystanders along the way. Small business can't get much smaller than a weekend vendor.

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 1, 2012 4:47 pm • link • report

@ jdollop Lock the 7th Street closing, the C street pie wedge, EM plaza and Natatorium sites down, now, is what I am suggesting. Bind it and get it in writing, with teeth. Provide a one-to-one replacement of lost spaces, which was the original deal. Don't settle for a drawing from the developers and "we will try." The EM plaza is likely as not to get pole-axed by the neighbors who are "Right-Sizing Hine" after zoning is done - they have a track record there.

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 1, 2012 4:55 pm • link • report

@readscottmartin I was under the impression only the City or the EM Trust can close those public spaces. Eastbank can't close them correct? So, what would an agreement look like that would satisfy the vendors?

by jdollop on Jun 1, 2012 4:58 pm • link • report

DA: Run the addresses through http://dcatlas.dcgis.dc.gov/mar/ and under "Type" you can quickly confirm if the address is residential or non-residential.

by Rob P on Jun 1, 2012 5:21 pm • link • report

Okay ... I've been ignoring the Hines discussion because, frankly, it's not in my neighborhood and I, like most of you on here, shouldn't really get a say in what is clearly a neighborhood issue. That said, since some of you are going to get involved in others' business anyways, have you bothered to try to understand both sides of the issue? I just Googled "Right Size Hines" (http://rightsizehine.org/) and I'm seeing issues raised there that I haven't seen raised here. After reading that it's like we have two very stories going on. For example, the attempt to paint the neighbors as nimby and anti-urbanist falls apart with a simple high level reading of the site. They're the neighbors who worked to get development into that site and they're the neighbors who chose to live there in that urban environment vs. the suburbs. And THEIR STORY from what I'm hearing is one of betrayal. They'd pushed this project forward with very specific requirements of the project ... and then it got hijacked byt people looking to make a buck ... As is often the case in these disputes. People with no interest in the matter before all the work got done to make it happen, are their after its done to get their dibs in. If we're to have a fair and balanced discussion on the issue, let's review with the neighbors' viewpoint is and then contrast that with the developer's viewpoint.

by Lance on Jun 1, 2012 5:32 pm • link • report

I think it your duty to provide the citation that was the source of the allegation: here and here.

I think it has been proven that Stanton/Eastblanc has attempted to use planted commentary ("astroturf") to gain support from the political decision makers.

by goldfish on Jun 1, 2012 6:04 pm • link • report

@goldfish - EMMCA isn't a reliable source - I certainly wouldn't trust the author of that blog to filter out who he considers a legitimate source of support in the community. Btw, how would you classify support from neighboring businesses/organizations such as CHAMPS, BARRACK ROW, Woven History, Fairy Godmother, Forecast, Fragers etc. Are businesses not given a say?

by jdollop on Jun 1, 2012 6:16 pm • link • report

goldfish: Yes, I meant to include a link. I've added the most recent of those 2 to the post.

by David Alpert on Jun 1, 2012 6:19 pm • link • report

@jdollop Tommy Wells has a decent outline and is going to try to get it through before the zoning meeting. The vendors' management feel it's taking EastBanc off the hook and I am inclined to agree, but I am not a vendor nor management and I speak for none of them. Clearly, this is on EastBanc to solve. They made the commitment, showed a little leg for doing the right thing with an open courtyard in early drawings, then took it away. They have a lot to answer for. If EastBanc had spent any energy on addressing it this winter instead of going in the other direction and reducing spaces, that deal might have been done by now.

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 1, 2012 6:21 pm • link • report

@readscottmartin I don't seem to get your logic about how Eastbank will "solve it". If the solution you point to is using other public spaces - that is a city/ EM Trust and Tommy Wells decision - not a private developers. Eastbank has no authority to promise to close other public space.

by jdollop on Jun 1, 2012 6:30 pm • link • report

[This comment has been deleted for violating the comment policy.]

by Anon on Jun 1, 2012 6:43 pm • link • report

I live and work in Capitol Hill and the planned monstrosity is not acceptable to me.

by Melody on Jun 1, 2012 8:39 pm • link • report

I think that the older EMMCA post goldfish links to regarding their FOIA request for the 'letters of support' looks very credible and looks a lot like astroturfing. At the very least it's verifiable so anyone questioning their report can presumably ask for the raw data and check for themselves: http://emmcablog.org/2011/11/27/deputy-mayors-office-cited-misleading-data-justifying-award-to-hine-developer-foia-permits-closer-look-at-manufactured-consensus-for-stantons-hine-development/

by Simon on Jun 1, 2012 8:42 pm • link • report

The 75-foot height on many DC main streets, including my own 14th Street, NW, is a disaster. The difference between the construction and environmental effects of a 6 and a 7 story building are enormous and not worth the extra floor.

Buildings up to 6 stories can be quickly built cheaply with frame or block construction and no underground structure is required. 7 stories and above have to be solid concrete requiring a big excavation for an underground structure (always a a garage). That underground structure in most of the city has to be pumped out for ground water 24/7 with no fees for sewage. That's when our $2.8 Billion under-river sewage tunnels are mandated.

Construction of a concrete 7 story easily takes 2 years with traffic, pedestrians, and bikes disrupted for the entire 2 year. The noise from excavation drilling is like a daily root canal. A 6 story can go up in 6 months with minor disruptions.

The concrete 7 story ends up being much more expensive and hence demands much higher rent or sell prices, inflating the local market.

It's a shame the Capitol Hill people didn't have our 14th Street experience and think to agree to no parking garage in return for 6 story construction.

If a building is substantially over 7 stories, the increased density may be beneficial. If we're talking 13 stories or more certainly the density matters. But for a 7 story over a 6 story, 7 stories is a loser.

And this might be why the traditional urban high-density pattern is 4-6 story construction in most of the western world.

by Tom Coumaris on Jun 1, 2012 11:17 pm • link • report

@ jdollop. You do a mean impression of Ken Golding. Very strictly and legalistically speaking, it's probably correct the developers can skate on the commitment they made at RFP to provide a replacement. Or argue they never made that commitment, though I haven't seen that, to their credit. They are almost there however.

by Read Scott Martin on Jun 2, 2012 9:18 am • link • report

@Tom - so you'd support 9 stories facing Penn, then?

by Dave on Jun 2, 2012 10:10 am • link • report

Thanks Lance, for at least listening to the neighbors' viewpoints.

Addresses do not come up when I scroll over the map. We've had a problem with astroturfing and this developer. Can you provide the addresses please? Everything we've done over on our side is public information.

And thanks for clarifying that Ivan and Brian are pro-project. I printed this story out, and it explains a lot.

by Kathleen on Jun 2, 2012 11:20 am • link • report

@Tom Coumaris: "It's a shame the Capitol Hill people didn't have our 14th Street experience and think to agree to no parking garage in return for 6 story construction." Yes, it is a shame. Unfortunately, many of my dear neighbors (I live 2 blocks from Hine) are completely irrational on the subject of parking, and simply will not understand such a trade-off.

@Kathleen: "Can you provide the addresses please?" When I used the GGW response form, I deliberately omitted my house number (so that I'm presumably not on the map). I'm a simple resident with no connections to the developer and not employed in that industry, and I'd rather not take the chance of having my address bandied about in this connection. (In fact, David Alpert seems to be handling this well, and I probably shouldn't have worried.)

by A Streeter on Jun 2, 2012 12:49 pm • link • report

@Kathleen, Did you maybe mean to address your comment to David?

I agree though that addresses, and names, should be provided. When you sign a petition for something, or lobby your councilmember, or write a letter to the editor, that is always a mandatory prerequisite. It ensures full transparency is given. I mean, if we're talking about presenting one's opinions on a blog, being anonymous and/or untraceable is fine. But when those opinions are being used to influence policy in the real world, then that shouldn't be.

by Lance on Jun 2, 2012 11:21 pm • link • report

Interesting - when this post was being put together, a concern was that including addresses would raise howls about outing people without their permission. Instead, we have calls asking for those addresses now.

I guess you can't ever make some people happy.

For what it's worth, I sent a letter in favor of a better project specifically noting that I don't live in the neighborhood. But I shop there, recreate there, socialize there, help with local politics there, and damnitall, it's my "one city" too, so I sure think that I have as much right as anyone else to speak up.

by Geoffrey Hatchard on Jun 3, 2012 9:19 am • link • report

I've been ignoring the Hines discussion because, frankly, it's not in my neighborhood and I, like most of you on here, shouldn't really get a say in what is clearly a neighborhood issue.

Just wanted to point out that this kind of question begging doesn't really advance the conversation. The idea that this is "a local question for local people" is ridiculous. We all have a stake in what our city is becoming, and how we get there. The idea that the final decision should be up to some handful of residents who live within 2 blocks of any development is just myopic.

by oboe on Jun 3, 2012 9:50 am • link • report

@Geoffrey " a concern was that including addresses would raise howls about outing people without their permission

I think you've pinpointed the issue here. In order for these people's opinions to be presented as 'proof' that 'Hine Supporters do live on Capitol Hill', their names and addresses would need to be released, AND in order to do that, they would have need to have been advised before submitting their letters that their identity and addresses would be released. This is because people will sometimes say different things or act differently when they know they must stand behind their words or actions. I guess in brief, really what this comes down to is that GGW can claim anything they want in regards to who lives where or wants what. But the powers that be can't give any weight to those unsigned, un-addressed claims.

by Lance on Jun 3, 2012 10:29 am • link • report

@lance In addition to GGW letters which go out to ANC Reps, there are over 100+ signed letters filed at the zoning commission - around 3/4 are cap hill residents, the others - people who work on Hill, businesses (Fragers, Forecast, etc.) and organizations on Hill (Barracks Row, CHAMPS, Eastern Market Row, etc). To see the letters yourself go to

http://app.dcoz.dc.gov/content/search/Search.aspx

Type in Case Number 11-24

Look for yourself.

by josh_hill939 on Jun 3, 2012 10:51 am • link • report

The only reason we'd need names and addresses on a petition is if it's being presented to a judge. A blog on the other hand may have it in its own interests to not carry those risks because this petition while bringing up valid concerns still doesn't carry that same legal weight. We'll get over it.

Besides, the group of regular commenters on here is fairly small and people generally adhere to at least sticking with consistent handles (apparently X, is too generic now so i've switched to this, not a problem however).

Anyway, anytime a contentious development project is discussed there is always an accusation that all the commenters are somehow employed by a myriad of construction companies. The conspiracy begins to break down around there.

by drumz on Jun 3, 2012 11:22 am • link • report

@josh_hill, I'm not questioning whether there's real support for this proposal on the Hill or not. I'm just questioning the process ... i.e., whether (1) all sides of the argument have been presented on here by the moderators/bloggers and (2) whether letters of support without a name/address are of any value in determining support, and if 'yes' to 'who' and in 'what way'.

Incidentally, you mention people who work on the Hill and organizations located on the Hill. While it's nice to know their viewpoints, and in an indirect way they are indeed stakeholders, they can't be given much weight in the matter since they're not the registered voters in the area. For good or for bad, it's registered voters who are supposed to be in the driver's seat in regards to matters such as these. If we forget that fact, before you know it we'll have corporations deemed 'persons' and let loose to influence all matter of politics via their corporate dollars ... Oh wait ... that's already happening, isn't it ?

by Lance on Jun 3, 2012 11:27 am • link • report

I subscribe to the Capitol Hill listserv and yes, someone who is anti-Hines project did indeed rudely question another listserver's motives because he lived on K St SE, a few blocks away. He simply expressed that he would be at the meeting as a Hines project supporter and hoped others with his viewpoint would be there.

So I can see why people are reticent.

by lou on Jun 3, 2012 1:12 pm • link • report

@lou, From what I can tell, K St SE isn't in the Capitol Hill neighborhood. It's in the neighborhood formerly known as simply 'Southeast' and nowadays 'Near Southeast). Maybe that's why he shouldn't may be going to that neighborhood meeting ... ? I mean, I live just as close to Adam Morgan ... but it's not my neighborhood ...

by Lance on Jun 3, 2012 1:40 pm • link • report

@Lance,

In your 11:27 post you say it's "registered voters" that should count, then in your 1:40 post you dismiss someone who lives at K Street SE, which is clearly in Ward 6. What are your boundaries of who should count, as obviously registered voters is too wide a net for you.

by Tim Krepp on Jun 3, 2012 4:52 pm • link • report

Tim: The answer you're looking for is "whatever will include only people who are against this density that you kids are in favor of." ;)

by Geoffrey Hatchard on Jun 3, 2012 8:05 pm • link • report

@Geoff, I just hope they draw boundaries to keep Congressional Cemetery on the Hill. I'd hate to gerrymander out Elridge Gerry.

by Tim Krepp on Jun 3, 2012 8:30 pm • link • report

@Tim, What are your boundaries of who should count, as obviously registered voters is too wide a net for you.

Yes, it is. For example, just because one is registered to vote in Arlington, Virginia, doesn't give them a right to get much weight in deciding an issue related solely to Capitol Hill. Ditto, even a Ward 6 person not registered in Capitol Hill doesn't get full weight.

by Lance on Jun 3, 2012 8:55 pm • link • report

Personally, I look forward to more threads where we constantly question each others motivations and demand full names and addresses in order to determine the validity and merits of opinions and arguments.

by drumz on Jun 3, 2012 10:03 pm • link • report

@drumz, The issue of who is qualified to advocate on behalf of or against a proposed development is not in the context of our debate here on this blog, but rather in the context of the real political debate going on 'out there'. I.e., GGW rules are pretty clear that everyone's opinion is not only welcome, but solicited on this blog. But that doesn't mean that the same rules apply in the real world forum of discussion where decisions get made. Just like the Historic Preservation Review Board will only consider arguments involving historic appropriateness (as defined by the historic preservation laws), the boards and commissions which will review the Hines project will do so only from the angle of the constituents they represent.

by Lance on Jun 3, 2012 11:57 pm • link • report

Sorry, but K St SE is the Hill, whatever someone in a more expensive house might believe

by anon on Jun 4, 2012 4:04 pm • link • report

@Anon, It has nothing to do with the value of the house. It has to do with where K Street lies. Below is a link to a map of the Capitol Historic District. And given that the question here is whether the building is compatible with the historic district, I'd say that's a pretty good gauge of 'Capitol Neighborhood or not' in this case. Besides, the ANC it falls in (2nd link below) is what historically was called 'Southeast' before it got bulldozed for the ballpark.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=capitol+hill+historic+district+map&oq=capitol+hill+historic+district+map&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&gs_l=hp.3..0.3174.4211.2.4537.4.2.0.2.2.0.198.392.0j2.2.0...0.0.I_rMvqQq3TU&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=be92a6bf3be444e8&biw=1152&bih=583

www.anc6d.org/map.html

by Lance on Jun 5, 2012 12:35 am • link • report

*Capitol Hill Historic District and Capitol Hill Neighborhood

by Lance on Jun 5, 2012 12:36 am • link • report

@Lance
I live in the Historic District and it's not the end all be all of the Hill. Sorry, but near SE, Hill East, H St. are all widely considered Hill by people who live here.

by anon on Jun 5, 2012 11:52 am • link • report

Sorry Lance but he lives in walking distance to Hines, lives in Ward 6 so he's a legitimate Capitol Hill voter as far as I'm concerned. I live in the historic district of Capitol Hill, but not as close as this guy to the Hines project. Why should I get a vote and he doesn't?

by lou on Jun 5, 2012 1:23 pm • link • report

@Lance If we were only to include those who live in the Capitol Hill Historic District from having a voice, we would eliminate 4 ANC6B Commissioners Frances Campbell, Neil Glick, Brian Flahaven, Carol J. Green from being allowed to have an opinion on the project. Should their voices not count?

by rtg on Jun 5, 2012 2:49 pm • link • report

I have lived 2 blocks from Hine for the last 30 years and assure you about 90% of the neighbors just want this development to be more attractive and lose one more floor - making it 5 floors.

We moved here because its a great neighborhood. If we wanted to live somewhere horribly congested we'd have moved to NW! Its becoming worse every time I go there.

As residents, we ARE EMMCA and Hine Neigbors North as well as other organizations advocating for what we considder more responsible development. etc...

WHY DON'T YOU TRUST US? We have a good idea what our neighborhood can support. And if you don't trust us, don't build or move here, we aren't moving anytime soon. We are the reason people WANT to move here, without the people, Capitol Hill Eastern Market area us just another area in which to live.

"Just because you don't understand us, does not mean we aren't right."
-a neighbor

by Rosina on Oct 22, 2012 8:50 pm • link • report