DATE: May 22, 2018 TO: Chairperson, DC Historic Preservation Board FROM: Bertha G. Holliday ANC 5E07 Commissioner, 2° VP-Bloomingdale Civic Association ENT ON HI’ PLICATION = TI TH = 1! My name is Bertha Holliday and I am a Bloomingdale resident for nearly 30 years. I reside at 49 T Street NW and serve as the ANC SMD Commissioner for 5E07 - the SMD in which the St. Paul’s (aka Tabor Presbyterian) Church is located. I also serve as the Second Vice President of the Bloomingdale Civic Association (BCA). Background When a For Sale sign was posted on the St. Paul’s Church, Bloomingdale residents began chatting about who would purchase the church and the use to which it would be put. After the Church was purchased, some Bloomingdale residents approached the DC Preservation League (DCPL) and inquired about the possibility of seeking Historic Landmark designation. In December, 2017, DCPL filed a Landmark application with HPRB. Apparently, simultaneously, the church’s new owner/developer (Kadida Development) filed a raze permit, which apparently was issued in error by DCRA after Landmark application filing. Consequently, the developer was required to surrender his raze permit until such time as HPRB makes a decision on the Landmark application. DCPL sent me a copy of the Application, and I subsequently posted on the Bloomingdale listserv and blog a brief notice of the Application and its web location. Community Outreach The owner/developer of 150 S St., NW, Kadida Development, first contacted me on January 2, 2018 regarding guidance related to management of issues associated with the Landmark application. In response, I suggested that the development team meet with me at my home, emphasized the need for community engagement, and explained the roles of the Bloomingdale Civic Association (BCA) and ANC 5E in the Landmark hearing process. We met for about 2 hours on 1/10/18 and during part of that time conferenced-called DCPL's Executive Director and Community Outreach Director. Mr. Kadida was encouraged to contact HPO staff for technical assistance and guidance. Mr. Kadida indicated he is committed to working with the community and wants to make all parties happy. But he also has consistently indicated his opposition to the Landmark Designation Application. The developer has also coordinated with a group of approximately 12 neighbors who live proximate to the proposed development, and has attended at least 3 meetings with the neighbor group. I have also attended most of those meetings and maintained activeemail exchange with the group's convener. The neighbors seem to be primarily concerned with the impact the development will have on on-street parking, and strongly desire that the developer provide at least 8 off-street parking spaces for the proposed eight residential 3-bedroom units. The neighbor group recently began soliciting letters and petition signatures in opposition to Landmark designation, while numerous other residents have similarly indicated their support for designation. For each of the multiple extensions of date for the HPRB St. Paul's Landmark hearing, T have informed the Developer of the nearest dates of regularly scheduled BCA and ANC SE meetings prior to each of the hearing dates and inquired if I should get Kadida Development placed on the agenda. The Developer has presented three times to the BCA membership: The first presentation focused on general information about the proposed development; at the second, the Developer requested a vote of support. But BCA was unwilling to take such a vote until the neighbor group had taken @ position, and @ rendering for a proposal that responded to Landmark designation was presented to the BCA. At the third presentation on 5/21/18, the Developer failed to present a rendering of a Landmark- eligible option, again reiterated such option would not allow parking as the Church could not be partially demolished, and requested a vote. Also, the neighbor group expressed its OPPOSITION to the Application. BCA membership voted to SUPPORT the Landmark application. The Developer did not request to be placed on the most recent (May 15, 2018) agenda of [ANC SE, and hence foreclosed the possibility of ANC comment at the HPRB 5/24/2018 hearing. Major Issues/Concerns 1. The Developer consistently has indicated its opposition to Landmark designation of 150 S Street NW, and has hired an attorney to pursue such opposition. He has also indicated his desire to raze the property and develop it on a “by right’ basis. Developer has stated his belief that no zoning exceptions or variances or will be required. 2. The Developer has repeatedly claimed that DCPL has indicated inflexibility related to supporting partial demolition of the rear of the church. I have sought clarification from DCPL regarding this claim, but to date I have received no response. 3. Developer has indicated the current depth of the church prevents access and space necessary for the creation of at least 8 rear off-street parking spaces, and cites that such impossibility and inflexibility prevents him from developing a Landmark eligible development option (including at least 8 rear off-street parking spaces). 4. Because of such impossibility, the Developer has failed to develop a design rendering (only a plat of building locations) for a Landmark-eligible development, although the BCA and I have requested to review such a rendering.5. In the absence of a visual rendering and layout of a Landmark-eligible option, the community narrative on the Landmark Designation of St. Paul's increasingly has focused solely on strengths/weaknesses of the single non-Landmark option. Consequently, the neighbor group and other residents sometimes have given minimal consideration to: a) whether the application meets Landmark criteria, b) the worthiness of the proposed Landmark Designation, c) the strengths/weaknesses and costs/benefits of a Landmark proposal when compared to those of a non- Landmark ‘by right’ proposal, and d) implications of the relative absence of community influence on the actual exterior design of "matter of right’ development, which is driven primarily by zoning and building codes, and building permit requirements -- thus opening the possibility of degradation of the architectural integrity of the 100 block of S Street NW and the 1700 block of 2™ Street NW. Tam an ANC Commissioner in one of the fastest_gentrifying neighborhoods in DC, which means neighborhood changes of all kinds typically involve widely varying opinions reflecting residents’ differing past experiences, perspectives, and values. I seek to minimize neighborhood divisiveness and the related perpetuation of ‘myth-making’, by encouraging a search for ‘common ground’ among the varying opinions. Consequently, T respectfully suggest to HPRB the following 3-part recommendation: «Either APPROVE the St. Paul's Landmark Designation Application with a period of significance of 1927 -1975 (consistent with significant BCA efforts), or for @ short period, DEFER a decision on this Application. «Encourage the Owner/Developer of the St. Paul's property to develop and submit @ design proposal(s) that responds to HPRB’s Landmark design concept guidelines. Consistent with DC regulations on historic landmarks, such a proposal might possibly involve: a) partial demolition of the building (e.g.,(rear and west facades, and part of the building roofline); b) retention and restoration of approximately 15 - 20 feet of the depth of its peaked roofline and new 3-story construction behind the truncated roofline; c) retention and restoration of the building's front facade (including its tower) and approximately 30 feet of its east facade including the window openings of both of these facades; ‘d) other alterations and restoration that might be necessary for ensuring access and construction of at least eight rear off-street parking spaces; and e) referencing of some of the building's architectural details (e.g. round window) on new construction units. * If necessary, Support a partial demolition permit and subdivision as requested by the Developer, and as consistent with an approved design concept. Rationale, Such actions hopefully will promote a broad and more informed neighborhood discussion focused on Landmark Designation in general, and more specifically, the strengths/weaknesses and costs/benefits of at least two alternative proposals (Landmark-eligible and non-Landmark) for St. Paul’s.. In addition, the proposed recommendation might also ensure that in the event the St. Paul's Application is approved, the proposed conceptual design for the proposed development will address legitimate contemporary neighborhood parking and housing needs. Although doing so might require, as noted above, limited demolition and alteration of the Church, even with such changes, the restored remaining portion of the Church will exhibit high historic architectural integrity. Demolition of the rear and west facades will result in minor loss of major architectural ‘character-defining’ elements, as the building's significant architectural composition and features are on the front and east facades. Consequently the building will still instantly read as a ‘neighborhood church’ that architecturally conveys a sense of time, place and historic association that is highly compatible with its immediate architectural environ of late Victorian family rowhouse residences. Furthermore, the church's social history reveals St. Paul's is not only an architecturally identifiable ‘neighborhood church’, but functioned as such --especially during its years as Tabor Presbyterian Church (the first Black congregation in Bloomingdale). For example, during the Tabor period (1927 - 1975), the church relied primarily on the Le Droit Park and Bloomingdale neighborhoods for its membership; provided exceptional leadership mentoring and opportunities for its adult and youth members and others; and nurtured and supported neighborhood organizations (e.g., the nearly 90 year old BCA) and efforts focused on political and social activism -- especially related to the desegregation of major neighborhood institutions and the equitable provision of the neighborhood’s public services (e.g., schools, parks, racial housing covenants, public accommodations, civil service employment, public space improvements, crime control, etc.) - sometimes with city-wide and national impact. Thus, retention and Landmark Designation of St. Paul's Church will serve to remind all District residents and others that our nation’s Civil Rights Movement (circa 1950 - 1980) was to a large extent due to the genius of the multiple change strategies exhibited by the independent social-political localized efforts of individual African-American neighborhood churches. Subsequently, those strategies have served to both provide models for community-building, and inform other civil rights efforts throughout our nation - e.g., disability rights, women’s rights, and GLBTQ rights, etc. The Bgard’s consideration is respectfully appreciated. “Pat thed Bertha G, Holliday Cc: Rebecca Miller, Executive Diretfor, DC Preservation League DC Historic Preservation Office Bradley Thomas, Chair, ANC 5E Teri Janine Quinn, President, Bloomingdale Civic Association Brian Smith, Convener, Neighbors Group, Tom Kadida, Principal, Kadida Development