The important and most contentious item on the agenda was the Friends Of Bundy Park "update" on their extensive support for a dog park in ANC2C02. ANC2C04 Commissioner Sule and ANC2C03 Commissioner Brooks dominated and controlled the discussion. ANC2C02 Commissioner Chapple spoke up on behalf of residents in his SMD and the supporters of the dog park and proposed that OPM and Safe Shores should consider some compromise on their plans for use of the vacant lot at Bundy for parking. This item was taken to a vote.
Sule and Brooks voted against a dog park at Bundy. Chapple and Padro voted in favor. There was a second vote related to dog parks which I still don't completely understand, but maybe one of our ANC's might clarify that vote.
One resident — who lives adjacent two Bundy and owns two properties on the west side of Bundy Athletic fields — brought in official DC Municipal Regulations on parking for schools and other buildings which suggest that a Building like Bundy, should have only 1 parking space for every 600 square feet of floor space. To justify 75 parking spaces at the vacant lot at Bundy, the Bundy School would need to be 45,000 square feet. The resident, who is an architect, noted that the Bundy School could not possibly contain anything close that much floor space.
Even The Editor of the Seventh Streeter (who does not live on one of the blocks adjacent to the Bundy School and who voiced her opinion against a dog park at the Bundy vacant lot) confirmed that ANC2C Chair/Commissioner Brooks was unfair in the way she mishandled the public discussion about Bundy during the meeting.
The Mayor's office announce at the CCCA meeting Tuesday that in the next few weeks OPM and Safe Shores will announce and hold a public meeting on the land transfer and usage of the vacant lot at Bundy and Safe Shore's use of the Bundy School.
I find it very disappointing that our ANC still cannot seem to disseminate an agenda and hold a well-organized meeting like so many other ANCs across the city. Even though I live in Mount Vernon Square, I receive the agendas for ANC 2B (Dupont) and ANC 2F (Logan Circle). They are sent directly to my email, arrive like clockwork several days before each meeting, and include a complete list of items/speakers/and anticipated start times. They are also posted online on each ANC's website. For some reason, this basic task cannot be accomplished in Shaw.
It is unreasonable to expect residents to leave work early or to sacrifice time with their families or friends (even dogs who would like to get walked in the dog park they don't have), to attend a meeting for what purpose no one knows except possibly some of the Commissioners. I simply won't do it.
Any meeting that involves votes on issues that were not announced sufficiently in advance to the public are suspect.
Posted By Cary Silverman / At 7/1/09 7:16 PM
Ms Sule recently quoted Mr Obama's Father's Day message in one of her announcements. Perhaps she should pay closer attention and follow the other important policies and initiatives with which he and his administration have taken leadership roles.
I and several other citizens walked out of the meeting in disgust before the issue of the ANC2C web site could be discussed. In the time the ANC has been fumbling this issue, other web sites have popped up in relatively record time to serve the community (FriendsOfBundy.net and CCCA-online.org + blog).
There was also a discussion about the market at 6th & Q Streets last night which I missed. I'll try to contact the owner and invite him to a CCCA meeting to inform residents about his new proposal.
Posted By martin / At 7/2/09 3:04 AM
“This site is in my district. I have talked to the residents who live around that district, who live adjacent to that park — to that lot — that is not being used. And we have a petition with many many signatures who support it. Now when we [Commissioners] are put in this position, we’re not put in this position to represent government agencies. We’re put in this position to represent the residents who live here. The residents who live here, who live adjacent to that parking lot, do not support a huge parking lot in a residential area.
“Now I understand that this agency needs parking although most government agencies do not have parking. … Most government agencies do not have parking for their employees. Their employees take public transportation or use private lots that they pay for out of their own expenditures. Now I understand that parking may be needed at this facility, but I do believe that a compromise can be made between that agency and the residents who do not support that there should be a parking lot of that size in their neighborhood.
“And I move that this Commission support a motion that we ask OPM and the Mayor’s Office to develop some type of compromise between the residents and the agencies that are going to be there so this lot will not be totally consumed by a parking lot, but can be used for green spaces, namely a dog park.”
— Commissioner Kevin L Chapple, ANC 2C02
http://ccca-online.org/node/33
Posted By martin / At 7/4/09 7:37 PM
As for the Bundy Lot, I really believe that we should split the difference in terms of parking/dog park. I think that is where this discussion seems to be heading.....the more important thing to ask is why the plans for the lot were developed without community input??!?!
I think we should press the DPR and others on that point. While we do pay Govt officials to manage the affiars of government, when it comes to development of significant portions of communities, they should ask for said community's input before sending out a press release TELLING people what they are going to do.
Posted By Rickey W. / At 7/6/09 12:53 PM
