The Bard PUD and Exhibits

THE BARD, A JOINT DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN ERKILETIAN DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY AND THE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE, LLC
APPLICATION TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ZONING COMMISSION FOR

CONSOLIDATED REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
February 3, 2016
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
APPLICANT:
The Bard, a joint development between

Erkiletian Development Company and The
Shakespeare Theatre Company, LLC
c/o Erkiletian Development Company
2009 14th Street North
Suite One
Arlington, VA 22201
c/o Shakespeare Theatre Company
516 8th Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003
ARCHITECT:
Shalom Baranes Associates,

Architects
1010 Wisconsin Ave. NW, Suite 900
INTERIORS:
Stoiber & Associates, PC

1621 Connecticut Ave NW, #200
Washington DC 20009
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
Parker Rodriguez
101 N. Union St. Suite 320
Alexandria, VA 22314
CIVIL ENGINEER:
Bohler Engineering
1301 Pennsylvania, NW #825
TRAFFIC ENGINEER:
Gorove/Slade Associates
1140 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 600
Washington DC 20036
LAND USE COUNSEL:
Griffin, Murphy,
Moldenhauer & Wiggins, LLP
1912 Sunderland Place NW
Washington DC 20036
EXHIBITS
DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT
Architectural Drawings; Elevations; Photographs of the

Subject Property and Surrounding Area; Tabulation of Development Data;
Landscape Plans; Transportation & Loading Plans; and Civil Plans
Zoning Data Development Table
Surveyors Plat of the Subject Property
Preliminary Transportation Review Letter
Agent Authorization Letter
Map Amendment and Consolidated PUD Forms
Certificate of Notice, Notice of Intent, and

List of Property Owners within 200 Feet
Proposed Public Benefits
Community Outreach Summary
PREFACE
This statement and the attached documents support the application of The Bard, a joint
development between Erkiletian Development Company and The Shakespeare Theatre, LLC, to
the Zoning Commission for the consolidated review and approval of the Planned Unit
Development and Related Map Amendment to the Zoning Map of the District of Columbia.
This Planned Unit Development and Related Map Amendment application (the
Application) is consistent with the District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan, D.C. Law 16300, 10 DCMR (Planning and Development) 100 et seq. (2006) (the Comprehensive Plan), as
well as the Southwest Neighborhood Small Area Plan, D.C. Resolution 21-128 (2015) (SW
Plan), and numerous other goals and policies of the District of Columbia. Submitted in support
of the Application are completed application forms, a notice of intent to file PUD (with property
owner list and certification of mailing), architectural drawings, plans, and elevations, and a map
depicting the Zoning District for the property impacted by the Application and the surrounding
area. As set forth below, this statement and the attached documents meet the filing requirements
for a Planned Unit Development and Zoning Map Amendment application under Chapter 24 of
the District of Columbia Zoning Regulations (Title 11, District of Columbia Municipal
Regulations).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Development Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Exhibits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
I.
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
A.
Summary of Requested Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 7
B.
The Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
II.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

A.
Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
B.
Site History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
C.
Surrounding Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
D.
Transit Rich Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
III.
THE PROPOSED PUD PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

A.
Project Goals and Objectives and the Benefits

of Using the PUD Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
B.
Project Description History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
C.
Current Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
D.
Development Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
E.
Flexibility Under the PUD Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
IV.
PLANNING ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

A.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
B.
The Applicants Proposed Zone Designation is Not Inconsistent with the Comprehensive
Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
C.
Land Use Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38

5
D.
Zoning Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
E.
Environmental Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
F.
Facilities Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
G.
Traffic Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
V.
PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

A.
The Impact of the Project under Section 2403.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
B.
Not Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan Under Section 2403.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
C.
Other Application Filing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
D.
Public Benefits and Project Amenities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
VI.
COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

A.
District-Wide Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50
B.
Compliance with Area Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
C.
Compliance with Southwest Neighborhood Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57
VII.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
VIII. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62
I.
INTRODUCTION
The Bard, a joint development between Erkiletian Development Company and The
Shakespeare Theatre, LLC, (the Applicant) hereby submits this application to the Zoning
Commission of the District of Columbia (Commission) for the consolidated review and
approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and a corresponding amendment to the
Zoning Map of the District of Columbia. The project site, 501 I Street SW, consists of Lot 52 in
Square 498 (the Property).
The Property stands at the corner of Square 498 in Southwest Washington, D.C. The
Property is bounded by I Street SW to the south, 6th Street SW to the west, a townhome
community to the north, and Amidon-Bowden Elementary school to the east. The Property is
currently unimproved. It was previously the site of Southeastern University, but that structure
was razed in July 2015. The Property includes approximately 36,476 square feet of land area and
is located within the boundaries of Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) 6D.
A.
Summary of Requested Action
The Applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use building (Proposed Development or

Project) at the Property that incorporates residential uses, non-profit offices, art studios,
educational space, and housing for the Shakespeare Theatre Companys actors and fellows. The
Proposed Development consists of approximately 136 residential units, including 93 market-rate
units, 9 Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) units, 29 actor-housing units, and 5 fellow-housing units.
The Proposed Development shall house a variety of Shakespeare Theatre Company uses,
including but not limited to rehearsal space, costume fabrication space, non-profit offices, and
education studios. The plans, elevations, and drawings of the proposed PUD project are included
in Exhibit A.
The Property is currently located in the R-3 Zone District. The Property is also located in
the Institutional category of the District of Columbia Future Land Use Map. The Institutional
category does not have a density or intensity designation. The Applicant requests a Zoning Map
amendment to map the Property within the SP-2 Zone District. The SP-2 Zone District is a
7
transitional zone, and as explained in detail in the Application, the proposed rezoning is
consistent with the overarching goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan of the District of
Columbia.
B.
The Applicant
The Shakespeare Theatre Company (STC) was established as a program of the Folger
Shakespeare Library in 1986 as a production theatre. In 1992, STC moved from the 246-seat
theatre at the Folger Shakespeare Library to the 451-seat Lansburgh Theatre in the newly
restored Lansburgh building. In 2004, in partnership with the International Union of Bricklayers
and Allied Craftworkers, STC co-developed the final phase of the mixed-use Terrell Place
project with the Harmon Center for the Arts. In October 2007, STC opened Sidney Harman
Hall, a 774-seat theatre in Penn Quarter. Today, STC produces 6-7 theatre productions per year
and hosts dozens of performing arts programs at both Sidney Harman Hall and the Lansburgh
Theatre.
STC also provides arts education programs to more than 44 District of Columbia schools.
STCs District Shakespeare program has served more than 8,000 students from 38 schools across
all 8 wards since 2011 by inviting one grade-level from DC public and charter high schools to
see a STC production free of charge. In addition, STC offers master acting classes for teens and
adults, summer acting camps for ages 9 to 18, fellowships and apprenticeships in theatre
administration and production, and a Master of Fine Arts degree in classical acting at STCs
Academy for Classical Acting at George Washington University.
STC is committed to serving all DC residents, and endeavors to make theatre not a
privilege, but a vital, accessible centerpiece in the community. Each summer, STC presents a
series of free Shakespeare performances as part of its Free for All programming. Started in
1991 to bring free Shakespeare performances to new and diverse audiences in the Washington
metropolitan area, the Free For All presented Shakespeare under the stars at the Carter Barron
Amphitheater. In an effort to make Shakespeare accessible to all D.C. Metro area residents, the
Free For All was brought to downtown D.C. in 2009 and now resides at STCs Sidney Harman
8
Hall. To date, the Free For All has reached more than 590,000 area residents and counting. For
the 25th anniversary of Free for All, STC created the FREE WILL ticket program to ensure that
its doors are open year-round to anyone who does not, or feels they cannot, see theatre. The
program offers 1,000 free tickets to each of STCs mainstage season productions on a first-come,
first-serve basis.
STC contributes locally to enhancing the arts culture in both the Penn Quarter and
Capitol Hill neighborhoods, and helps to drive an artistic renaissance in Washington, D.C. Since
1991, STC has leased rehearsal and costume fabrication space along 8th Street SEs Barracks
Row. In 2000, STC purchased its administrative offices and education space in another
building on the same block. To house its actors (a requirement of the Actors Equity standard
contract), STC also leases approximately 18-30 apartments every season across the District. The
multiple operational space locations and varying leases have created increasingly challenging
administrative and operational problems for STC and its staff.
The most pressing challenge of leasing multiple spaces throughout the District is
adjusting and responding to the D.C. real estate market.
Since 2007, the Barracks Row
neighborhood has exploded with growth.1 Housing rents have become an increasingly significant
financial burden on STC since the mid 2000s. Rents at STCs production facilities have also
increased steadily. Consequently, STC began to strategically plan for consolidating its housing,
administration and production needs into one facility. In 2011, STC pursued collaboration on a
development project that would have included space for STC, but unfortunately, that project
could not accommodate STCs space requirements, forcing STC to pursue other options. Over
the next few years, STC continued to look for new properties and opportunities to consolidate its
rehearsal and education studios, costume shop, offices, and housing. In 2013, the owner of
STCs leased rehearsal spaces and costume shop desired to increase rents and reposition that
On December 11, 2015, the Washington Post reported that 717 8 th Street, SE, home to Roses Luxury, sold for $4.1
million, likely setting a record for price- per- square foot on Capitol Hill. See Home of Roses Luxury sells for $4.1
million in all-time historic flip, The Washington Post, December 11, 2015.
property into a restaurant and/or retail space, adding urgency to STCs need for a new
consolidated space.
In 2013, STC conducted a bid process, seeking a development partner with whom to
collaborate to develop and construct a project that would have a minimum of 30 actor-housing
units and housing for 16 fellows; new administrative offices; rehearsal spaces; costume
fabrication spaces; and education/classroom spaces.
STC selected Erkiletian Development
Company, a family-owned and -run business specializing in multifamily housing, to be its

partner on the project.
Erkiletian Development Company (Erkiletian or EDC) has been developing and
building communities throughout the Washington metropolitan area for over 45 years. Founded
in 1968 by Mike Erkiletian, EDC prides itself on developing projects that are integrated in the
fabric of the community with a respectful approach to contextual design. Erkiletian is not a
merchant developer, building and flipping projects upon completion, but rather a long-term
investor in the site and the community. For example, EDC still owns and operates an apartment
community in McLean, Virginia that it completed in 1972.
In Erkiletians commitment to the future of their communities, the company strives for
innovative urban planning, focused on limiting sprawl and creating value in already developed
areas.
Their deep roots in these communities and long-standing relationships with local
governments make them leaders in smart, sustainable development.

Erkiletian is dedicated to, and strongly emphasizes, developing residential buildings that
are sustainable with an advanced green-living approach. Erkiletian is at the forefront in LEED
rankings, being one of the first companies to achieve LEED Gold for residential developments in
Arlington and LEED Silver for residential developments in Alexandria.
Each one of the companys residential developments has a focus and philosophy on
outdoor living. In designing each building, Erkiletian works with both forward-thinking building
10
architects and landscape architects to ensure the creation of cohesive outdoor oasis/living areas
with interactive landscape features where their residents can enjoy and escape.
II.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA

A.
Site Location
The Property is located at the southwest corner of Square 498, with frontage on I Street
SW and 6th Street SW in the Southwest neighborhood of Ward 6. The Property is currently
unimproved and vacant. The Subject Property consists of approximately 36,476 square feet of
land area. The Property has approximately 135 feet of linear frontage along I Street SW, and
223 feet of linear frontage along 6th Street SW. The Property is a large corner lot with an
approximately 44-foot wide by approximately 145-foot deep dogleg extending east behind the
adjacent property. As more specifically stated below, the Property was previously improved
with a large, brutalist building that was most recently home to Southeastern University (SEU).
B.
Site History
In 1948, the Property was improved with a clubhouse for the Metropolitan Police
Department Boys Club Number 4 (Boys Club).
The Boys Club included a gymnasium,
library, game room, craft rooms, kitchen, and dressing rooms. The Districts Redevelopment
Land Agency (RLA) acquired the Property as a part of the urban renewal period that involved
clearing a substantial portion of Southwest to make way for new residential and commercial
buildings.
Pursuant to the Southwest Urban Renewal Plan, the RLA acquired parcels of land to
permit redevelopment. The executive director of the RLA was the parent of a student at the
Hawthorne School, a private academic institution, then operating out of a Victorian home
scheduled for demolition in 1963.
The Hawthorne School acquired the Property in 1961,
remodeled and enlarged the building to suit the needs of their new school building, and moved
into the new structure in 1964. The newly expanded building accommodated 200 students. The
Hawthorne Schools enrollment peaked at 170 students.
11
The Hawthorne School operated on the premises until 1972, when, amid financial
turmoil, it sold the Property to SE, which was a private, not-for-profit institution. SEU served
many Federal employees pursuing degree programs or seeking to take refresher courses;
according, its proximity to nearby federal agencies was beneficial.
For nearly 40 years, SEU operated in this Southwest neighborhood, on this Property. In
1996, the Southwest Urban Renewal Plan expired, and the Zoning Commission, upon application
of the Office of Planning (OP), applied for zoning designations to the neighborhood, including
the Property. Despite the institutional use then in existence, the Property was classified in the R3 Zone District (row dwellings).
By the fall of 2008, SEUs enrollment had dwindled to approximately 645 students and
160 faculty and adjunct professors2. In 2009, SEU, facing a loss of accreditation, announced that
it would be purchased by Graduate School USA, a continuing education school created by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. SEUs final classes were held on the Property in the summer of
2009, and the Graduate School embarked on a plan to use the Property for its courses. The
Graduate School determined shortly thereafter that the building did not meet their programmatic
needs. The Graduate School put the Property up for sale in a sealed bid process. A number of
developers participated in the sale, most of whom proposed high-rise residential development.
In 2013, the Graduate School USA entered into a contract for sale with STC and
Erkiletian for development rights of the Property. As You Like It, LLC, a limited liability
company created for the purposes of purchasing the Property closed on the Property on
September 30, 2014. As You Like It is a pastoral play by William Shakespeare believed to be
written in 1599. As You Like It follows its heroine Rosalind as she flees persecution in her
uncles court, accompanied by her cousin Celia to find safety and, eventually, love, in the Forest
of Arden. In the forest, they encounter a variety of memorable characters, notably the
melancholy traveler Jaques who speaks many of Shakespeares most famous and most oft quoted
De Vise, Daniel. Southeastern U. acquired by another school in D.C, The Washington Post, March 6, 2010.
Online Edition. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030503859.html.
12
speeches, such as All the world's a stage. Erkiletian and STC believed the name appropriately
reflected STCs hope of finding safety and freedom from the Districts real estate market by
placing down roots on its property in the Southwest.
C.
Surrounding Area
The area surrounding the Property is experiencing a refocused surge in development

prompted by the redevelopment of the Southwest Waterfront, known as The Wharf, as well as
the mixed-use, office, retail and residential developments adjacent to the Waterfront Metro
station. In that project, the D.C. Government leases much of the office space, while the ground
floor retail is leased to Safeway supermarket, CVS drug store and a handful of restaurants. The
area to the south, southeast and southwest of the Property has become a bustling mixed-use
town center bolstered by the presence of larger apartments (both existing and new), office
tenants and the Arena Stage Theatre.
North and northwest of the Property is a townhome community with private cul-de-sacs.
There are approximately 85 townhomes south of G Street SW.
These townhomes were
constructed in phases in the 1960s as part of the urban renewal period of development in the
Southwest. A majority of the townhouses were built when the institutional Hawthorn School
was operating. Similar in design, many of the townhomes are three-stories or two-stories plus a
cellar. Of the approximately 85 townhomes, approximately 16 have private garages, 48 have a
parking space in front of their dwelling, and the cul-de-sacs provide parking for approximately
24 vehicles. Adjacent to the Property on the east is Amidon-Bowen Elementary School.
Though the Property shares the townhouse communities R-3 zoning, its long established
institutional use buffered the townhomes from higher density zones and developments in the
immediate vicinity. Directly diagonal to the Property, across I Street SW, is one of the three 10story, 100-foot tall apartment buildings, that are a part of the Waterside Towers Complex, an
apartment and townhouse-style community located in the R-5-D Zone District. One block east
of the Property is Potomac Place Tower, a nine-story, 100 foot-tall condominium building with
over 390 residential units, located in the R-5-C Zone District. Two blocks southwest of the
Property, on the other side of the Waterside Towers Complex, is the Riverside Baptist Church,
13
which was set down by the Commission in Case No. 15-05 for a mixed-use development that
will include the new home for Riverside Baptist Church, 6,900-7,900 square feet of ground floor
community servicing retail, and a 90-foot residential building with approximately 170 units, in
the C-3-A Zone.
The properties located south of the Property, particularly the residential towers and
offices, are located in the R-5-D and C-3-C Zone Districts, respectively.
The two office
th
buildings on 4 Street were redeveloped pursuant to a PUD that rezoned the parcel from C-3-B
to C-3-C.3 Another PUD, the Mill Creek Residential PUD, rezoned the 3.1 acres bounded by 6 th
Street to the west, K Street SW to the north, and M Street SW to the south, from R-5-D to C-3C.4 The Southwest quadrant is comprised of zoning designations that promote a mix of high and
low density development, a unique and recognizable development pattern in Southwest.
D.
Transit-Rich Community
The Property is well serviced by a number of public transportation facilities and services
including Metrorail, Metrobus, Capital Bikeshare, and Zipcars. Located only 0.3 miles from the
Property is the Waterfront Metro Station, which provides access to the Green Line. The LEnfant
Plaza Metro is only 0.4 miles away and provides access to the Blue, Yellow, Orange, and Silver
Metro Lines. The Property is only 1.1 miles from the Judiciary Square Metro station, which
provides access to the Red line.
In addition to rail lines, the Property is directly accessible by bus. Metrobus V1 has a
stop in front of the Property, directly across I Street SW. Metrobus P6, A46, 74, A42, and A48
are all within 0.1 miles of the Property. Also in close proximity to the Property are a number of
the Districts bikesharing and carsharing programs. There are five Capital Bikeshare stations
located within 0.5 miles of the Property. The closest Capital Bikeshare stations are located 0.2
miles away at 6th Street SW and Water Street SW, and 4th Street SW and M Street SW. There
are six Zipcar facilities within 0.5 miles of the Property. The closest is less than one-half a block
3
Zoning Commission Order No. 02-38.

Zoning Commission Order No. 05-38.
14
away, at 502 I Street SW and has two cars available for use. Walkscore.com labels the property
as very walkable, very bikeable, and as having excellent transit.
III.
THE PROPOSED PUD PROJECT

A.
Project Goals and Objectives, and the Benefits of Using the PUD Process
The Applicant seeks to transform a currently vacant site into an active, vibrant residential
development with non-profit offices and arts-related uses for STC. The redevelopment of this
Property will complement the existing arts uses along I Street SW, serving as a bookend to the
burgeoning I Street SW arts corridor. Additionally, the proposed SP-2 development will serve as
an appropriate bridge and transition, allowing the projects height and massing to step down
towards the residential townhouse communities north of the Property, while maintaining the
high-low design and unique characteristic of the Southwest.
The Applicant envisions a new residential community that integrates well into the
existing residential community and reflects a reduction in the intensity of use from what the
neighborhood was accustomed to with the Hawthorn School and SEUs institutional uses on the
site. Further, the Applicant seeks to develop a building that will allow STC to continue to evolve
and serve the city as a whole in a greater capacity.
The Proposed Development will offer an architecturally significant building that
creatively incorporates artistic elements visually associated with the arts and Shakespearian
theatre. With the Southwest Waterfront Metro station just three blocks south of the Property, the
Project embodies the type of transit-oriented development that residents, STC employees,
fellows, and actors prefer and will heavily utilize. In addition, the construction of non-profit
office space, art studios, educational space, and actor and fellow housing will allow STC to
remain in the District and continue to provide its substantial benefits to the District as a whole
and the Districts arts and thespian community.
The PUD process ensures that this project will be a high-quality development that results
from continued and organic community input. Given the prior use and institutional designation,
15
the PUD process provides the Applicant with the necessary flexibility to rezone the site, house
STCs varied uses, and contribute quality market-rate housing to the community in a way that
aligns with the Comprehensive Plan and design guidelines articulated in the recently approved
SW Plan.
B.
Project Description History
The Applicants goal for this project has always been to develop the Property with a
residential apartment building that would enhance the local community, add to the Southwest
arts community, and benefit the Districts performing arts programs as a whole. In furtherance
of that goal, over the course of three years, the Applicant has held community meetings and met
with various community and neighborhood stakeholders. As a result of feedback and sometimes
criticism, the Applicant has improved the project in the following, substantial ways.
1.
Initial Project Design - Unbridled Expectation
In first approaching the Project, the Applicant initially mirrored the Southwests
prominent low-high design features anticipating a project similar in height to other high towers
in the vicinity. The Applicant initially proposed a nine-story, 4.63 FAR mixed-use building
containing approximately 44,965 square feet of office, educational, and artist production spaces,
including 27,405 square feet of rehearsal space located underground and not chargeable to
FAR. That proposed building was 90 feet tall and included an additional 18-foot, 6-inch amenity
penthouse. It would have contained approximately 140 market-rate housing units co-located
with 30 actor-housing units and 16 dormitory-style units for STC fellows in a three-story
attached, secondary wing on the northeast corner of the Property. Following presentations of this
preliminary massing to the Southwest Neighborhood Assembly, Inc. (SWNA), a Southwest
neighborhood leadership organization, on or about April 2014 and May 2014, the Applicant
determined modifications would be necessary.
2.
Recalibrated Project Proposal
During the summer of 2014, the Applicant engaged in community meetings regarding the
rezoning, massing, demolition, Duck Pond Programming, and community benefits.
16
After
meeting with community members and orally presenting to the June 9, 2014 ANC 6D, the
Applicant posited reducing the project height below 90 feet and welcomed specific, actionable
recommendations and suggestions.
3.
Community Negotiation
In September of 2014, the Applicant continued community outreach and entered into an
agreement with SWNA (SWNA Agreement) to, among other things, limit the programmed
uses of the building, cap the maximum FAR of the proposed building to 4.5, and to provide a
minimum of 70 on-site parking spaces. The negotiated height, density, and list of community
benefits were the result of input from more than three months of community meetings.
Following the SWNA Agreement, the Applicant worked with SWNA and Townhouse
Management I and III, to coordinate a public charrette for the Applicant to receive additional
community insight, comments, concerns, and feedback.
4.
Project Revisions
Following the above stated community meeting phase, the Applicant embarked on a sixmonth design process to incorporate the negotiated height and FAR limitations and community
comments. In June 2015, the Applicant re-engaged ANC leadership and local stakeholders to
present the updated design. The Applicant conducted community outreach through a telephone
town hall and two public kiosk presentations of the revised design, community benefits, traffic
impact diagrams, and arts programs. During these meetings, the Applicant continued to receive
support as well as localized opposition from some of the townhouse neighbors.
In response to the townhouse neighbors concerns, the Applicant re-opened the dialogue
with ANC leadership in August. The Applicant conducted small meetings to receive design
input, present alternative massing options, and welcome specific actionable recommendations
and suggestions.
Further design modifications were made over a period of three months,
including but not limited to, reductions in FAR, height, and number of units, and modification of
the unit mix to include family-size, three-bedroom units.
17
The project history illustrates the continued dialogue the Applicant has embarked on with
the Southwest community. This Application is a reflection of the above-described Projects
evolution and community input (both before and after the DC Council approved the SW Plan).
The Applicant continues to engage the community with public presentations, including those
already scheduled for February 1st and 16th, to update the community on information and details
contained in this Application.
The Applicant anticipates further engagement with SWNA,
Townhouse Management I and III, ANC 6D, other stakeholders in the local vicinity, and District
residents as a whole during the PUD process.
C.
Current Project Description
The PUD and Zoning Map Amendment application proposes the development of a sevenstory, mixed-use building with residential, artist studios, non-profit office, and educational space.
The development will include 93 market-rate and 9 IZ residential units, 29 actor and 5 fellow
housing units, as well as approximately 43,1005 square feet devoted to artist studio space, nonprofit office space, and educational uses for the STC. The plans, elevations, and drawings of the
proposed project are included in Exhibit A.
As depicted in Exhibit A, the Application proposes a project of 4.09 FAR and
approximately 73 feet, 2 inches in height, consisting of up to 148 total housing units in 131,273
square feet (3.6 FAR) and 18,025 square feet (0.49 FAR) of non-profit office, artist studio, and
educational/classroom uses.
The building will house STCs world-renowned costume
fabrication studio on the ground floor, in accordance with the SW Plan recommendations for arts
and culture uses along this corridor. STCs educational and administrative spaces will be located
within the interior of the first floor and basement levels. Four rehearsal spaces (two of which
will be primarily used for the educational programs), costume storage, two classrooms, and
additional storage/support spaces will be located below grade.
Though the Project was revised to address community concerns, the design still adheres
to the SW Plans design guidelines for a pattern of high and low structures with the seven-story
5
This figure includes the basement square footage not included in the Floor Area Ratio defined in other sections.
18
73-foot, 2-inch tower as the high, and the 41-foot, 11-inch, fellow housing as the low. As
shown on the architectural plans in Exhibit A, the tallest portion of the Project fronts on I Street
and gradually steps down towards 6th Street. The section of the building on I Street, is 3-stories
shorter than the residential building caddy-corner to the Property. The gradual stepping down is
consistent with, and sensitive to, the Propertys surrounding context. In direct response to
concerns raised regarding the height of the Proposed Development, the placement of the shorter
portion of the building on the northern part of the Property results in a structure comparable in
height to the neighboring townhomes.
A residential lobby will be located at the intersection of 6th and I Streets SW, with the
entrance on I Street SW, per the communitys request. The building is proposed to be comprised
of market-rate residential units, IZ units, fellow housing, and actor housing. The following
provides more detail regarding the different uses.
1.
Market-Rate Apartments
The Project proposes 102 rental units, of which 93 are market-rate, in approximately
95,600 square feet. These units will be designed to attract long-term, community-invested
tenants. Erkiletian prides itself on building high-quality housing developments that tenants can
call home. As a result of the community dialogue, the proposed unit number was reduced by
23%, and the unit mix was revised to incorporate additional larger units.
2.
Inclusionary Zoning Compliance
The gross floor area of the IZ units is calculated based on the above approximately
95,600 square footage of total gross residential rental area6. The Applicant proposes to offer
nine IZ units at 80% Area Median Income (AMI). The units will include 2-studios, 5-onebedrooms and 2-two-bedrooms.
The fellow and actor housing units do not meet the goals of the IZ program and are analogous to exempt housing
uses; therefore, they should be exempt from the IZ program. Accordingly, those uses were not included in the IZ
calculation.
19
3.
Fellow Housing
The STC is a non-profit theatre company committed to bringing vibrant groundbreaking,

thought-provoking, and accessible theatre in a uniquely American style to the District.
In
addition to hosting six to seven plays, STC accommodates seventeen fellows annually.
STCs professional fellowships are season-long, full-time commitments lasting
approximately ten months. Schedules are rigorous; administrative fellows work 40 hours per
week plus additional weekend and evening hours as needed, and production and artistic fellows
work 40 to 60 hours per week.
STC provides its fellows accommodations for the duration of their program pursuant to
their fellowship admission. STC currently owns a 16-bedroom apartment building on Capitol
Hill, which it uses for fellow housing and rents one additional apartment for fellow use. The cost
of housing and real estate in the District has increased dramatically over the last decade-plus. In
addition, STCs apartment building is old and becoming increasingly costly to maintain. Since
2007, STC has sought to consolidate its auxiliary operations, along with its fellow and actor
housing into one location.
In order to address this need, the Proposed Development includes five fellow housing
units that will provide four bedrooms per unit, in a modified dormitory style layout. Each unit
will be furnished. These new housing units will allow STC to expand its program to 20 fellows,
a long sought-after goal. The fellows will reside in the units for a pre-determined period, not to
exceed one year. The fellows do not pay STC any compensation for housing; rather, the
provision of accommodations is a part of their program and they receive a small stipend for
living expenses.
The fellows are a part of a class that participates in numerous STC activities and
programs. Their stays are limited to the duration of the fellowship program, and fellows cannot
choose to extend their stay beyond a pre-determined period, although STC may choose to invite
certain fellows to return for a second fellowship period. The proposed fellow housing is similar
20
in design and uses to a dormitory, US Senate Page Housing, graduate housing or other similar IZ
exempt housing types. 11 DCMR 2602.3.
The fellow selection process is highly competitive, as only 20 fellows will be selected out
of a pool of between 600 to 1,000 candidates. Those accepted into the fellowship program select
a discipline to study.
For example, management fellows assist in the daily operations of
production administration through union adherence and guest artist hospitality.
Education
fellows support the implementation of school and community training, and audience enrichment
programs. Graphic design fellows receive hands-on training in conceptualizing, creating and
preparing pieces for print. Theatre management fellows interact with all departments including
artistic, production, education, marketing, development, and business. Costume fellows assist in
costume construction, shop maintenance, and running the companys mainstage productions and
other projects.
Stage management fellows work closely with Equity and non-Equity stage
managers, assisting in all aspects of stage management, from pre-production preparation to

rehearsal and through the run of the show as part of the running crew. Fellows may have the
opportunity to stage manage special events and are eligible to receive Equity Membership
Candidate points, which are required to become a member of the Actors Equity Association.
The STC provides a unique opportunity for early career actors to perform in a full season
of plays. Acting Fellows compose the non-Equity ensemble for most or all of STCs mainstage
plays, serve as understudies, and receive training in voice, speech, and stage combat. The artistic
fellows assist the associate artistic director, artistic associate, and literary manager on casting,
script preparation, production research, and other duties related to the smooth operation of the
artistic department. The directing fellows assist the creative teams with mainstage productions
over the course of the season, which may include serving as a lead assistant director or as a
second assistant.
STCs renowned and competitive fellowship program helps to establish the District as a
national arts destination. Moreover, due to this fellowships diversity of specialties, quality, and
rigor, the fellows, upon completion of the fellowship are uniquely positioned to contribute to the
many other theatre programs in the District. Indeed, many of the graduates of the fellowship
21
program have used the opportunity to obtain employment in the District and continue to
contribute to the local art community long after the conclusion of their fellowship.
4.
Actor Housing
Every year, the theatre hosts six to seven plays, and brings a variety of talented actors and
actresses to the District. Actors are an essential part of any stage play, and their presence, though
temporary and rotational, contributes greatly to the Districts artist community. Further, actors,
through their performance, have the ability to elevate the status of a production. Additionally, as
with many short-term residents, their time in the District, while limited, can be very impactful.
The STC provides accommodations for actors during their performance run. Actors are
unionized and have negotiated national and regional contracts with theaters in the United States
through the Actors Equity Association. These Equity agreements provide minimum salaries,
benefits, job security, and numerous other protections to ensure a safe and dignified work
environment. Equity contracts cover housing for actors. Actor and theatrical salaries are often
below 50% AMI7; however, actors are entitled to out-of-pocket travel expenses and living
accommodations during their performance to help offset their salaries. STC currently contracts
with Bridgestreet, a corporate housing and serviced apartments company, to provide actor
housing in the Penn Quarter area at great expense to the theatre.
As with many jobs that require extensive travel, the provision of housing or
compensation for housing is a condition of employment for actors in STCs productions.
Typical business travelers can book at hotels or inns; and, therefore, the actor housing proposed
as part of this Project is similarly designed for a transient individual.8 The individuals occupying
these housing types may stay for a few months, or as long as the production or work assignment
is ongoing. However, just like, hotels and inns are not designed for individuals seeking a
permanent home; actor-housing units are not the permanent residence for any of the actors. And
just as hotels and inns are necessary, and a benefit to, the District because their presence permits
7
The District of Columbias Area Median Income (AMI) for fiscal year 2015 was $109,200, which equals a weekly
salary of approximately $2,100. The average high-end weekly salary for union actors working at STC is
approximately $1,020, or 48.6% AMI.
8
Hotel, motels and inn uses are exempt from the Inclusionary Zoning program. 11 DCMR 2602.3(a).
22
visitors and short-term residents to contribute meaningful time, expenditures, and ideas to the
District, actor housing is a benefit to the District because it permits a nationally-recognized
theatre to attract and host the actors that are the center of each stage production. Thus, just as the
housing built in connection with fire stations is not calculated as housing for IZ requirements,
similarly actor housing provided in connection with employment should not be calculated as
housing for the IZ requirement.
The actors only reside in the residential units for the run of a particular show, which from
rehearsals to performance may be approximately 10-12 weeks. The actors return home or move
on to the next job once the show is complete. Similar to a hotel, the actors housing will be
assigned a furnished place to stay. Further, the actors will only be permitted to stay in the actorhousing units through the end of their performance. STC does not receive compensation for
housing the actors; it is an expense of theirs and a cost of doing business with transient
employees. Though the actors are only present in the District for short periods of time, similar
to many politicians, Washington sports team athletes, and others, their presence and contribution
to the District is meaningful and tangible.
5.
Non-Profit Office
The visible benefit of the STC is the six to seven plays the theatre hosts each year.
However, STC would not be able to provide quality theatrical performances or contribute to the
artistic community of the District without the countless hours of work and support of each STC
staff person. Non-profit offices are a special exception use under the SP Zoning District. The
STC cannot function without their support staff; the addition of an art use to the I Street SW art
corridor, as suggested in the SW Plan, would not be possible without the inclusion of non-profit
office use. As the plans in Exhibit A show, over 34,056 gross square feet of floor area is
dedicated to STCs non-profit office space, which will include but is not limited to offices for
staff, a conference room, costume fabrication space, production storage, craft space, and a sound
studio.
23
6.
Art Studio Space
The Project includes two art studio spaces, specifically, two rehearsal studios. The
consolidation of STCs actor and fellow housing, rehearsal space, and costume fabrication onto
one site will dramatically improve the cohesiveness and efficiency of rehearsal time. Art studios
are a permitted use in the SP-2 Zone District.
7.
Educational Program
In addition to the six to seven stage plays STC hosts every season, STC also conducts a
number of local educational programs for students on campuses throughout the District, and
several programs/workshops for actors, directors, and production specialist at every level of
expertise. These educational programs and workshops are run all over the District of Columbia
Public Schools. These programs contribute to the artistic fabric of the District and provide an
invaluable resource for those interested in developing their talent and skills in theatre. Programs
that target students and future thespians include:
Camp Shakespeare Young actors, between the age of seven and 18, dive head first into
the world of the greatest playwright in history, William Shakespeare. Under the guidance
of theatre professionals, participants unravel his plays with text analysis; transform into
Shakespeares characters through voice, movement, and improvisation work; wage
battles against mortal enemies with stage combat; and develop fundamental acting skills
using classical theatre techniques.
To culminate each session, participants stage a
performance for friends and family at STC.

Shakespearience Matinees designed to give students and teachers access to classical
theatre on stage, deepening their study of literature, drama, and language in the classroom
and fostering appreciation for the performing arts.
Artist in the Community As an active participant in the communities it serves, STC
supports neighborhood community festivals and events by providing workshops and
performances.
24
Text Alive! An in-school program designed to help students and their teachers develop
greater knowledge, understanding, and even a love for Shakespeare. It is the STCs
oldest running program. Each semester, teaching artists visit classrooms throughout the
District to run weekly theatre workshops and an in-depth rehearsal and performance
process.
District Shakespeare As discussed above, District Shakespeare aims to provide a free,
live, classical theatre experience to every D.C. Public School and D.C. Public Charter
School serving grades 9 through 12. Participating schools receive pre-performance
workshops, tickets for all attending teachers and students, curriculum guides and bus
transportation to and from the theatre all at no cost to the school or student.
STCs adult and professional development programs include:
Academy for Classical Acting The STC and George Washington University offer a
one-year intensive, 59 credit, graduate program that culminates in a Masters of Fine Arts
degree. The curriculum focuses on the specific craft of acting Shakespeare and other
classical texts.
The Directors Studio the Directors Studio is a local and early-career directors
program that consists of a series of workshops and discussions designed to investigate the
craft of theatrical direction.
Audience Enrichment Programs Engaging audience members with the work on stage
through discussion and dialogue, STCs audience enrichment programs includes Creative
Conversations, Reflections, Happenings Happy Hour, Symposia and Post-Show
Talkbacks.
25
Professional Development for Business Professionals Building on the success of its

popular Master Acting Class, Acting for Business Professionals, STC collaborates with a
number of organizations and government agencies to provide professional development
in communication, public speaking, leadership and team-building.
As with the educational uses that previously operated at the Property, the Applicant
proposes to continue the atmosphere of learning and personal development through the
educational studios on site as managed on site with the proposed non-profit administration
office.
D.
Development Parameters
The Property is currently classified within the R-3 Zone District, and is designated
Institutional on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The Guidelines For Using the
Generalized Policy Map and the Future Land Use Map, Section 226.1(h) of the Comprehensive
Plan, notes that Institutional designations do not have a density or intensity recommendation.
Rather, if a change in use occurs on a site designated Institutional, the new density or intensity
designation should be comparable in density or intensity to those in the vicinity unless
otherwise stated in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements or an approved Campus Plan. Id.
The Area Elements of the Comprehensive Plan do not include a recommendation for the
Property and the Property is not part of a Campus Plan. Therefore, the new density or intensity
designation will need to be comparable to the densities and intensities found near the Property.
And a land use change is contemplated upon a change in use.
The Property is located within the boundaries of the SW Plan, adopted by the Council for
the District of Columbia on July 14, 2015. The SW Plan specifically recommends the Property
for arts and cultural uses, stating
[I]t complements and augments the arts uses already in Southwest and further
anticipates the Plans vision for cultural uses along I Street. Convenient access
to Metro is also a plus for many of the visiting actors who would use the rehearsal
space.
26
SW Plan, p. 99. Virtually the only permitted uses allowed under the current R-3 zoning are lowdensity row dwellings. The Applicant seeks to develop the Property with arts and cultural uses,
and as also recommended by the SW Plans design guidelines, seeks to construct a higherdensity residential development adjacent to existing low-density neighborhoods to continue the
high-low design pattern that is predominant in Southwest. The Applicant seeks a rezoning to the
SP-2 (Special Purpose) Zone District as that Zone District allows both the uses outlined above
and the density recommended in the SW Plan.
1.
SP-2 Zoning
The Applicant proposes to change the zoning of the Property from R-3 (low density, row
dwellings) to SP-2 (Special Purpose). The SP District (Special Purpose) is designed to stabilize
those areas adjacent to C-3-C and C-4 Districts and other appropriate areas that contain: (a)
Existing apartments, offices and institutions; and (b) Mixed use buildings. 11 DCMR 500.1.
The major purpose of the SP District shall be to act as a buffer between adjoining commercial
and residential areas, and to ensure that new development is compatible in use, scale, and design
with the transitional function of this zone district. Id. 500.2. The SP District is designed to
preserve and protect areas adjacent to Commercial Districts that contain a mix of row houses,
apartments, offices, and institutions at a medium to high density, including buildings of historic
and architectural merit. Id. 500.3.
The Applicant proposes the SP District as an appropriate buffer zone between the lowdensity row dwellings to the north and west and the high-density apartment buildings constructed
under the Urban Renewal (thus pre-dating District of Columbia Zoning designations for this
area) to the south and east, as well as the burgeoning Town Center at 4th and I Streets SW to the
immediate southeast of the Property.
27
The SP-2 District permits a maximum height of 90 feet with no limit on the number of
stories. 11 DCMR 530. A penthouse is permitted above the maximum building height, to a
maximum of 20 feet above the roof, provided that the penthouse is setback from the floor below
at a one-to-one ratio. Id. 411, 537.
In the SP-2 District, the maximum permitted FAR is 6.0 as a matter of right, or 6.5 FAR
through a PUD. 11 DCMR 531. The rear yard required must be a minimum depth of two and
one-half inches (2 1/2 in.) per foot of vertical distance from the mean finished grade at the
middle of the rear of the structure to the highest point of the main roof or parapet wall, but not
less than twelve feet (12 ft.). Id. 534. No side yard is required, however, if one is provided,
the side yard setback required is two inches (2 in.) per foot of vertical height, with a minimum
28
width of eight feet (8 ft.). Id. 535. Closed courts must be four inches wide per foot of height,
with a minimum of 15 feet wide. Id. 536.3.
The parking and loading requirements in the SP-2 District are based on the proposed use
of the Property. One parking space per four dwelling units is required. Non-Profit office uses
are required to have one parking space per every 1,800 square feet of floor area in excess of
2,000 square feet. The art studios require one for every 600 square feet of space. The
educational uses require one space per ten classroom seats, plus two spaces for every three
teachers.
11 DCMR 2101.1. The proposed uses will require loading facilities that, at a
minimum, include one 55 loading berth, one 200 square-foot loading platform, and one
service/delivery parking space at 20 deep. 11 DCMR 2201.1
Moreover, the SP-2 Zoning District is an appropriate zone based on bulk, height, density
and uses needed to permit the programmatic needs of STC.
2.
Proposed Development Parameters
The proposed development is very appropriate for the density and height requirements of
this location. Consistent with the SWNA Agreement and the SP-2 Zone District, the total gross
floor area included in the proposed PUD is approximately 149,298 square feet for a total FAR of
approximately 4.09.
Of the 4.09 FAR, 2.70 FAR will be devoted to market-rate and IZ
residential units, and 1.39 FAR will be devoted to a variety of STC uses. The height of the
proposed building will vary. The maximum building height of the proposed building will be 73
feet, 2 inches along I Street SW, with the northwestern section of the building stepping down to
41 feet, 11 inches. The Project will include 70 below-grade parking spaces, accessible from 6th
Street SW. The Project will also include approximately 75 long-term and 10 short-term bicycle
parking spaces. The SP-2 District permits a maximum FAR of 6.0 (3.0 commercial) as a matter
of right and a maximum FAR of 6.5 (4.5 commercial) in a PUD project. The maximum height
allowed as a matter of right and for a PUD in the SP-2 Zone District is 90 feet.
Chapter 24 of the Zoning Regulations will also govern the proposed PUD. Chapter 24
requires a minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet for a PUD. 11 DCMR 2401.1. The Zoning
29
Tabulations on sheet 1.12 of Exhibit A illustrate the zoning requirements for the existing and
proposed zoning.
E.
Flexibility Under the PUD Guidelines

The PUD process was created to allow greater flexibility in planning and design than may
otherwise be possible under conventional zoning procedures. The overall goal is to permit
flexibility in property development, and other incentives, so long as the project offers a
substantial number, or quality, of public benefits and advances the publics health, safety,
welfare, and convenience. 11 DCMR 2400.2. Pursuant to 2403, the Commission may grant
such flexibility in its discretion. Accordingly, the Applicant seeks flexibility from the following
provisions of the Zoning Regulations:
1. Flexibility from the Court Requirements
The Applicant requests flexibility from 536.3 and 536.4 of the Zoning Regulations.
Section 536.3 requires that the width of closed courts for a building devoted to residential uses in
the SP-2 be a minimum of four inches per foot (4 in/foot) of height measured from the lowest
level of the court to that elevation; provided, that in no case shall the width of court be less than
fifteen feet (15 ft.). Section 536.4 of the Zoning Regulations requires that the area of a closed
court be at least twice the square of the width of the court based upon the height of the court, but
not less than three hundred fifty square feet (350 sq. ft.). As shown on the Zoning Tabulation
sheet of the Architectural Plan at Exhibit A, the required closed court width for Court #2 is 21
feet, and the required area is 882 square feet. Closed Court #2 has ample area, with 1,918 square
feet; however, it is fifteen feet wide and, thus, requires flexibility from 536.3. Given the
configuration of the building on the lot, which is driven in part by the location of the buildings
core, providing a confirming closed court would result in a loss of building efficiency. The
provided closed court satisfies the intent of the closed court requirements because it provides
sufficient air and light through its large area, particularly since the area to the east of the building
is an open field.
30
Court #1 does not meet the requirements of 536.3 with respect to court width. However,
this open court permits a visually interesting and architecturally intriguing feature. Moreover, as
this court is effectively an architectural embellishment, it does not have an impact on the
availability of air and light to the building.
2.
Flexibility from the Loading Requirements
Under 2201.1, the required loading facilities for the Project are one 55-foot berth, one
200-square-foot platform, and one 20-foot deep space. The Project will provide loading facilities
as follows: one 30-foot berth, one 100-square-foot platform, and one 20-foot deep space. The
Applicant requests relief from the requirement for a 55-foot berth and associated 200 square foot
platform. New residents in similar apartment buildings rarely use large loading vehicles given
the size of the individual apartments, and such a berth is not required to accommodate the
buildings loadings needs.
3.
Flexibility from the Penthouse Setback
The Applicant requests flexibility from 537.1 and 411.18 of the Zoning Regulations,
which require that all penthouses be set back from the exterior walls of the building a distance
equal to the height above the roof upon which it is located. In order to accommodate the
mechanical equipment in a single penthouse and to be sensitive to the surrounding area by
minimizing the bulk of the enclosure, the Applicant requests flexibility from this setback
requirement. The penthouse is set back sufficiently to provide at least a one-to-one setback from
the public street; however, the penthouse is face on-line with the floor below on the eastern side
of the Property.
4.
Flexibility from the Compact Parking Requirements
Section 2101.1 of the Zoning Regulations requires one parking space for every four
dwelling units; one for every 1,800 square feet in excess of 2,000 square feet for the nonprofit
office use; one for every 600 square feet for the art studio space; two for every three teachers and
one space for every 10 classroom seats for the education use. Thus, pursuant to the architectural
31
plans, the Proposed Development requires 70 parking spaces: 36 parking spaces for the
residential component and 34 parking spaces for the STC related uses. Section 2115.2 of the
Zoning Regulations permits parking garages containing 25 or more required parking spaces to
designate up to 40 percent of these parking spaces for compact cars. Under 2115.4, the
compact parking spaces must be in groups of at least five contiguous spaces with access from the
same aisle. In this case, 51 of the 70 parking spaces, 73% of the parking spaces provided, are
compact parking spaces. Further, as shown on sheet 3.12 of the Plans, 34 of the compact parking
spaces are tandem, and four of the compact spaces are not in a continuous row of five spaces
with access from the same aisle. The tandem parking spaces are all for the STC, which will
operate and manage those parking spaces. Although the parking configuration does not comply
with the requirements of 2115.2 and 2115.4, the Applicant is providing a sufficient number
of parking spaces for the proposed uses on site. Therefore, the Applicant requests flexibility
from the compact parking requirements.
5.
Non-Profit Office
Section 508 of the Zoning Regulations permits the construction of a new office building
in the SP District by special exception under 3104, provided that the use, height, bulk, and
design of the office is in harmony with existing uses and structures on neighboring property, and
the use does not create dangerous or other objectionable traffic conditions.
The proposed nonprofit office use satisfies the special exception requirements of 508.
The nonprofit office use is analogous to the prior institutional uses that previously operated at the
Property. This use is therefore unlikely to adversely affect the use of neighboring properties.
Further, the Projects proposed height, bulk, and design are in harmony with the surrounding
structures. As previously noted, the buildings height is 73 feet, 2 inches at the corner of 6th
Street SW and I Street SW, and appropriately compliments the 100-foot tower that is directly
across the street. The building steps down to 41 feet, 11 inches on the northwest side of the
Property, which is consistent with the height and bulk of the residential properties on the north
side of the Property. Lastly, the proposed nonprofit office uses will not draw significant crowds
to the Property, and the Projects parking and loading is strategically located away from the
32
adjacent Amidon-Bowen elementary school and will have no impact on the schools drop-off
and pick-up zones. The proposed nonprofit office will therefore have no objectionable impact on
the traffic. For these reasons, the Applicant requests flexibility from the Zoning Commission to
permit the nonprofit office use at the Property.
6.
Additional Areas of Flexibility
The Applicant has made every effort to provide a level of detail that conveys the
significance and appropriateness of the Proposed Developments design for this location.
Nonetheless, some flexibility is necessary, some of which may not be anticipated at this time.
Thus, Applicant requests flexibility in the following areas:
a) To be able to provide a range of dwelling units between 126 and 148 (a 10%
deviation from the proposed unit count of 136).
b) To vary the location and design of all interior components, including

partitions, structural slabs, doors, hallways, columns, stairways, and
mechanical rooms, provided the variations do not change the exterior
configuration of the building.
c) To vary the number, location, and arrangement of parking spaces for the
project, provided that the total parking is not reduced below the minimum
level required by this approved PUD.
d) To vary the final selection of the exterior materials within the color ranges and
material types as proposed, based on availability at the time of construction,
without reducing the quality of the materials; and to make minor refinements
to exterior details and dimensions, including curtain wall mullions and
spandrels, window frames, glass types, belt courses, sills, bases, cornices,
railings and trim, or any other changes to comply with the District of
33
Columbia Building Code or that are otherwise necessary to obtain a final

building permit.
III. PLANNING ANALYSIS

A.
Introduction
The PUD process requires the Applicant to demonstrate that the Proposed Development
will not impose unacceptable impacts on the surrounding area or on city services. 11 DCMR
2403.3. Instead, its impact must be either favorable, capable of being mitigated, or acceptable
given the public benefits of the proposed development. Id. (emphasis added). Notably, a
Proposed Development must demonstrate that it is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. For the reasons explained below, the Project is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
B.
The Applicants Proposed Zone Designation is Not Inconsistent with

the Comprehensive Plan
The Project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The
District has a three-tier system of city planning comprised of city-wide policies known as
Citywide Elements, Ward-level policies known as Area Elements, and Small Area policies. The
Citywide Elements and the Area Elements are both part of the Comprehensive Plan, and carry
the same legal authority. See 10A DCMR 104.6. Small Area plans are neither part of the total
Comprehensive Plan nor part of the legislatively adopted document, but serve to supplement the
Comprehensive Plan. Id. 104.2 and 104.8. The Generalized Policy Map (GPM) and Future
Land Use Map (FLUM) are part of the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the GPM and FLUM
carry the same legal weight as the text of the Comprehensive Plan, and together guide land use
decisions and land use changes in conjunction with the text of the Comprehensive Plan. Id.
223.2 and 225.1.
To determine what is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Citywide
Elements, Area Elements, the GPM, and FLUM should be reviewed in the aggregate. See 10A
DCMR 108 (How to use the Comprehensive Plan). The Small Area Plan should be reviewed
34
to provide guidance during the review of the Comprehensive Plan. Id. 104.2 and 104.8. In
many circumstances, a review of these resources clearly outlines the Districts intended goals for
a property future uses. The Future Land Use Map indicates the future intensity and density of
use or the zoning designation for a property, and the Small Area Plan identifies target
properties.
The Future Land Use Map identifies the Property as an institutional use, which does not
have a density or an intensity designation. The SW Plan, passed by the District Council on July
14, 2015, identifies the Property as a Key Site for future development, but provides no specific
zone change recommendation.
Pursuant to 10A DCMR 226(h), Guidelines for Using the Generalized Policy Map and
the Future Land Use Map, if a change in use occurs on [an institutional site] in the future, the
new designation should be comparable in density or intensity to those designations in the
vicinity, unless otherwise stated in the Comprehensive Plan Area Elements or an approved
Campus Plan. (emphasis added). The Property is identified as an institutional use on the GPM
and FLUM. The Proposed Development seeks a use change from the institutional designation to
the SP-2 Zone District. The Applicant submits the following, illustrating that the SP-2 Zone
District is in line with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed designation is
appropriate and comparable in density or intensity to those designations in the vicinity.
1.
The Proposed Zoning Designation is Appropriate for the Property
The proposed SP-2 development is comparable to the density/intensity found in the

vicinity of the Property. The Comprehensive Plan does not define vicinity nor does it provide a
visual for its readers to ascertain the area encompassed under that term. The Comprehensive
Plan uses the word vicinity, and other descriptive terms such as surrounding area, adjacent
and immediate vicinity to illustrate varying levels of distance. However, a review of the
approximately 57 times the Comprehensive Plan uses the word vicinity reveals a logical
progression in the measurable area designated. Terms such as adjacent and immediate
vicinity encompass a smaller geographical range than terms such as vicinity and surrounding
area.
35
This logical progression in the area encompassed aligns with the plain meaning and
understanding for each descriptive term. Websters Dictionary defines the word adjacent as
close or near: sharing a border, wall, or point, and the term vicinity as the quality or state of
being near: proximity; a surrounding area or district: neighborhood.
As used in the
Comprehensive Plan, the term adjacent typically refers to abutting uses or zones, while vicinity
refers to a larger surrounding area.
For example, in 10A DCMR 1814.1, the Comprehensive Plan lists land uses in the
immediate vicinity of the Congress Heights Metro Station. The uses listed range in distance
from approximately 400 feet from the Metro Station to approximately 7,000 feet away, with a
majority of the uses being within 1,200 feet of the Metro Station.
Within a similar range from the Property, the following FLUM designations are found:
moderate density residential, medium density residential, high-density residential, local public
facilities, parks, recreation and open space, low-density commercial, moderate-density
commercial and high-density commercial.
The SP Zoning District, as a buffer zone, is not identified within a particular FLUM
designation; however, the Proposed Development seeks to construct a building ranging from 4stories to 7-stories, with the bulk and massing typical of buildings found in the Medium Density
Residential designation. The site plan on sheet 1.7 of the Plans in Exhibit A indicates that the
proposed SP Zoning District, while not identical to the designations that are adjacent to the
Property, is comparable to those found within 400 feet to 700 feet from the Property.
One of the goals when changing the land use designation for an institutional site to a new
designation is finding a designation that is compatible with the surrounding community. See
generally 10A DCMR 225.16. In Z.C. Case No. 08-21,9 a PUD application that proposed
changing the use and zone for an institutional site, the density and housing types that were
adjacent to the proposed development and up to 600 feet away were considered when finding
9
A review of the cases available on the Office of Zoning website returned only one case in which an institutional
site, which was not affiliated with a campus plan, proposed a new designation through the PUD process.
36
that the proposed land use designation was compatible with the community. In the present case,
even if the term vicinity was limited to the area to within 500 feet of the Property, the
proposed SP Zone remains compatible with the surrounding area, because it is comparable and
complimentary to the high-density residential and moderate density residential found in the
vicinity.
Moreover, it is readily apparent from reviewing the FLUM and the SW Plan that
Southwest contains many moderate-density residential areas abutting medium- or high-density
residential areas. The variation in density and intensity permits the Southwest to continue its
development pattern: namely, the adjacency of low-rise and high-rise structures. The SW Plan
discusses this design pattern at length on pages 81-84. The Square where the Property is located
lacks the juxtaposition of moderate to medium or high density found in the vicinity, a feature
present in nearly every other nearby Square. The proposed SP-2 Zone designation would permit
a residential development that would serve as a contextual high building in the high-low
design pattern present in the Squares in the immediate vicinity and allowing the continuation of
a signature design feature of the Southwest.
37
As the proposed SP-2 Zone Designation, a medium-density residential designation, is

comparable to the uses and heights in the vicinity, the proposed designation is not inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
C.
Land Use Impact
As detailed below, the Proposed Development is fully consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the District of Columbia. The Project has an appropriate
massing for a development within walking distance of a Metrorail station and Metrobus routes.
38
The building scale is entirely appropriate for a mixed-use residential structure with nonprofit
office and arts-related uses in this location, and the density is well below the permitted density
for a PUD in the SP-2 Zone District. In line with the purpose of the SP-2 zone as a buffer zone,
the Proposed Development is sensitively designed as an buffer between the high-density
development one block south of the Property and the low-density townhomes to the north of the
Property.
The Proposed Development will lead to the development of an idle site while
contributing to the artistic scene of the I Street SW corridor. Moreover, the STC educational
programs proposed for the Property will continue the Propertys longstanding history of use as
place for learning and professional development. Additionally, benefits to the surrounding
neighborhoods include the following: enhanced aesthetic of the surrounding public space;
provision of new affordable housing; and activation of the ground floor and sidewalk using art.
D.
Zoning Impact
The proposed PUD-Related Map Amendment can be granted without adversely affecting
nearby and adjacent zone districts. The rezoning of the Property would allow the Applicant to
build a project that aligns with the Districts and OPs goals for Southwest, in particular, the
redevelopment of an idle site for a recognized cultural use10.
The Applicant is requesting a Zoning Map Amendment to the SP-2 Zone in order to
accommodate the varied uses of the STC while providing enough density to create a viable
private-nonprofit partnership and replicate the high-low height pattern that is prevalent
throughout the Southwest.
The proposed SP-2 Zone District is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan as outlined below.

The SP-2 Zone District is appropriate given that many higher-density residential zones
are in very close proximity to the Property and that the Property is closely located to a Metrorail
station. The proposed density will be commensurate with, or less than, the residential towers in
10
In Z.C. Case No. 02-25, it was noted by an expert in the Modification and Further Processing of Notre Dame
Campus Plan, that trips to the Kennedy Center and the Shakespeare Theatre are organized cultural activities for
the young scholars that participate in the University of Notre Dames Semester in Washington Program.
39
the vicinity. Additionally, the permitted uses, bulk, and scale allowed in the SP-2 Zone will
facilitate a seamless transition from the higher-density residential and commercial zones near the
Property to the lower-density townhome community. Importantly, the SP-2 Zone permits the
non-profit office, art studio, educational space, and other art related uses required to ensure that
the Property can serve as a bookend to the I Street SW arts corridor as envisioned in the SW
Plan. Lastly, as the Proposed Development will not include any commercial uses; the SP-2
Zoning will not disrupt the residential nature of the adjacent properties as a result.
It is important to note that the requested SP Zone will minimize the impacts of the Project
on neighboring properties by allowing the Applicant to accommodate an appropriate massing of
the building. A lower density would render the Project unable to accommodate the required
variety of uses for the Proposed Development. Further, with any lower density it would also be
infeasible to concentrate the density away from the neighboring townhome properties, into a
seven-story tower. As currently designed, the building design steps down to 4-4 stories on the
north side of the site, where the Property abuts the 3-story and 4-story townhome community and
where the R-3 zone will remain. The Projects design with a residential tower on the southern
portion of the Property and a stepped-down lower-density portion of the residential structure to
the north follows the prevailing development pattern for the Southwest neighborhood and
complies with the recommended design guidelines of the SW Plan.
E.
Environmental Impact
No adverse environmental impact will result from the construction of the Project
Development. The Project will attain sufficient points to be LEED Silver Certified and will
incorporate a series of sustainable features that will minimize the impact of the development.
Specifically, the Project seeks to achieve the LEED credits detailed on sheet 7.1 of Exhibit A.
The Project will also meet the Green Area Ratio and storm water management requirements.
40
F.
Facilities Impact
The Proposed Development will not have adverse impacts on the public facilities on
which it will rely for services. The Property previously housed Southeastern University, which
had an enrollment of approximately 870 students and 140 faculty and staff. The proposed uses
residential units, non-profit offices, art studios, educational space, and actor and fellow housing
combined will result in fewer people on site utilizing public facilities. Therefore, the Proposed
Development will not burden the public facilities that service this Property.
G.
Traffic Impact
The Project will not have an adverse impact on pedestrians and traffic on the adjacent
streets, as described in the Preliminary Transportation Review Letter in Exhibit D.
The
sidewalks adjacent to the Project will provide acceptable levels of service for pedestrians, and
the ramp to the parking garage is located on 6th Street SW, thus reducing the interaction between
students going to Amidon-Bowen Elementary School and cars accessing the Projects garage.
Additionally, the Project is located approximately 0.3 miles from the entrance of the Waterfront
Metrorail Station, and approximately 0.4 miles from the LEnfant Metrorail Station. Multiple
Metrobus routes also serve the Property. High transit usage, as well as the promotion of other
alternatives to driving, will minimize the impact on public infrastructure. To encourage bicycle
uses, the Proposed Development will include bicycle storage for residents, as well as bicycle
storage and showers for STC employees.
IV.
PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS

In deciding a PUD application, the Commission is required to judge, balance, and
reconcile the relative value of the project amenities and public benefits offered, the degree of
development incentives requested, and any potential adverse effects according to the specific
circumstances of the case. 11 DCMR 2403.8. In order to approve a PUD application, the
Commission must find that the impact of the project on the surrounding area is either favorable,
41
capable of being mitigated, or acceptable given the quality of the public benefits in the project.
11 DCMR 2403.3. Additionally, the Commission must consider the Comprehensive Plan in its
totality, and reconcile seemingly contradictory goals, when seeking to determine whether a
proposal is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As the DC Court of Appeals stated
in Durant v. District of Columbia Zoning Commission,
[E]ven if a proposal conflicts with one or more individual policies associated with
the Comprehensive Plan, this does not, in and of itself, preclude the Commission
from concluding that the action would be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan as a whole. . . . The Plan is not a code of prohibitions; it is an interpretive
guide, which the Commission must consider holistically. It provides a broad
statement of policy to guide future public decision[-]making. Tenley &
Cleveland Park, supra, 550 A.2d [331,] 338 [(D.C. 1988)] (quoting Report of the
Committee of the Whole on Bill 5-282, District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan
Act of 1984 (Jan. 17, 1984)) (emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks
omitted). And [a]lthough the Plan serves as an important policy guide, its legal
mandate is more limited. Id. Except where specifically provided, the Plan is not
"binding"; it is only an interpretive tool. Id. Its discrete elements guide[,] but do
not direct the Commissions action, and it do[es] not impose specific
implementation techniques. Id. at 338-39. Accordingly, that some individual
policies may be facially at odds with a particular zoning action is not necessarily
dispositive; the Commission must still determine whether a proposed action
would be consistent with the Plan as a whole.
65 A.3d 1161,1168 (D.C. 2013) (internal citations removed)
The Proposed Development is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the
reasons explained in full below. We respectfully submit that while the Small Area Plan may not
be definitive on a proposed land use change, the general guidelines, specific elements and city
wide goals as a whole support this PUD request.
A.
The Impact of The Project Under Section 2403.3
The Proposed Development will have a favorable impact on the District, the Southwest
quadrant, and the surrounding neighborhoods.
Further, any slight negative impacts on the
townhome properties adjacent to the Property are capable of being mitigated and are far
outweighed by the benefits being offered to the Southwest community. Moreover, the Proposed
Development satisfies a number of the Districts goals for the Southwest quadrant.
42
B.
Not Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan under Section 2403.4
The Proposed Development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other public
policies, as detailed in Section V, and thus complies with 11 DCMR 2403.4.
C.
Other Application Filing Requirements
The Application complies with the process and requirements set forth in Chapter 24 of
the Zoning Regulations for review of a consolidated PUD application and PUD-related map
amendment application. Specifically, the Application complies with the requirements of
2401.1, 2406.11, and 2406.12 as follows:
1. Area Requirement. The Property contains approximately 36,476 square feet of land area,
which exceeds the minimum area requirement of 15,000 square feet for a PUD.
2. Notice. As stated on the certification attached as Exhibit G and as required by 2406.7
to 2406.10 of the Zoning Regulations, the Applicant provided notice of its intent to file a
zoning application to ANC 6D and the owners of all property within 200 feet of the
Property.
3. Sections 2406.11(a) and 2406.12(a). The completed application forms are included in
Exhibit F of this submission.
4. Section 2406.11(b). A map showing the location of the Property is included in the
architectural plans attached as Exhibit A.
5. Section 2406.11(d)-(e), 2406.12(c)-(f). Included in Exhibit A are plans, elevations, and
sections that includes a detailed site plan; detailed landscaping and grading plan; floor
plans, elevations, and sections of the Project; and a final detailed circulation plan.
6. Sections 2406.11(c) and 2406.12(g). This statement includes a narrative description of
the Project and its related features and impacts.
7. Section 2406.12(h). This statement addresses the consistency of the application with the
intent and purposes of the Zoning Regulations and the PUD process.
43
D.
Public Benefits and Project Amenities
The objective of the PUD process is to encourage high quality development that provides
public benefits and project amenities, by allowing applicants greater flexibility in planning and
design than may be possible under matter-of-right zoning. 11 DCMR 2400.1-2400.4. In
evaluating a proposed development, the Commission shall also evaluate the specific public
benefits and project amenities of a development. Id. 2403.5. Public benefits are superior
features of a proposed development that benefit the surrounding neighborhood or the public in
general to a significantly greater extent than would likely result from a matter of right
development. Id. 2403.6. A project amenity is one type of public benefit that adds to the
attractiveness, convenience, or comfort of the project for the occupants or the immediate
neighbors. Id. 2403.7. Pursuant to 2403.9, the Proposed Development is appropriate for a
PUD because of the numerous public benefits and amenities incorporated in the following
development features:
1.
Urban Design, Architecture, and Landscaping
Section 2403.9(a) of the Zoning Regulations lists urban design, architecture and
landscaping as a public benefit or project amenity of a proposed PUD that the Zoning
Commission should evaluate. The detailed renderings, plans, and elevations of the Project in
Exhibit A demonstrate that the Proposed Development exhibits all the characteristics of
exemplary urban design and architecture. The massing, height, and articulation of the building
have been carefully designed to honor the unique design features found in the Southwest, namely
the undulating heights culminating in a tower juxtaposed with low-rise buildings. The Proposed
Development, in light of the partnership with the STC, has also been designed using inspiration
from Shakespeare and other playwrights.
The Shakespeare-influenced design is heavily reflected in the courtyard, which includes
linear paving with in-grade lighting and textured patterning similar to a watermark, and folded
benches reminiscent of folded sheets of manuscript. Along I Street SW, the architecture includes
window glazing depicting imagery and quotations of Shakespeares works.
This artistic
treatment continues into the landscaping, which includes etched transparent panels and presents
44
imagery and quotations within the planting beds. The staggered art panels will populate I Street
SW with educational and artistic imagery, creating an intriguing and dynamic streetscape. The
educational component of the panels is particularly apropos considering the Propertys prior
educational uses and its proximity to Amidon-Bowen Elementary School.
In response to the design features across 6th Street, the plantings at the base of the
building are organized into small-scale parterre gardens that consist of low evergreen hedges
interplanted with ornamental grasses, groundcovers, and perennials.
The lush 6th Street
streetscape is very pedestrian-friendly and reinforces the Southwest neighborhoods identity as a

Green Oasis. SW Plan page 86.
2.
Site Planning, and Efficient and Economical Land Uses
The creation of a mixed-use project on the Property, with residential and artistic uses, is
an example of appropriate site planning and efficient and economical land use as a project
amenity consistent with Section 2403.9(b). The Proposed Development transforms an unutilized
parcel of land into a well-designed mixed-use structure. Further, the Proposed Development
provides a strategic transit-oriented site that appropriately focuses height and density at the south
of the site, so as not to disrupt the lower-scale residential uses to the north. In addition, the
Proposed Development aligns with and furthers the Districts goal of increasing the artistic and
cultural presence of the I Street SW corridor. SW Plan page 95.
3.
Effective and Safe Vehicular and Pedestrian Access and Transportation

Management
Pursuant to Section 2403.9(a), effective and safe vehicular and pedestrian access,
transportation management measures, connections to public transit service, and other measures
are evaluation criteria for a PUD application. Here, pedestrian access focuses on I Street SW and
is separated from the vehicular access point, which is located on 6th Street SW. The Applicants
proposed streetscape also improves the pedestrian experience along this connection area. The
Applicant will set back portions of the Proposed Development, creating a large courtyard along
45
6th Street SW designed to enhance the apparent width and feel of public space around the
Proposed Development.
Gorove Slade Associates, the transportation consultant for the Proposed Development,
has prepared a Preliminary Transportation Review Letter, Exhibit D, and will prepare a traffic
assessment prior to the public hearing. The assessment will include a proposed Transportation
Demand Management plan.
4.
Housing and Affordable Housing
Section 2403.9(f) of the Zoning Regulations states that housing and affordable housing
are public benefits that the PUD process seeks to encourage. Additionally, the Arts and Culture
Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that art professionals should be incorporated into the
affordable housing programs, thereby implying that artist housing is a type of affordable
housing. See 10A DCMR 1409.4. The Project will replace vacant parcel with a new mixed-use
residential building. The Project will provide approximately 102 residential units in an area of
the District that is rapidly growing, and
eight percent of the 102 residential units, or
approximately 9 units, will be set aside as affordable housing in connection with the Inclusionary
Zoning program, for households earning up to 80% of the area median income. The demand for
housing in the District and, in particular, the Southwest Waterfront neighborhood is increasing,
and the Project will alleviate some of the demand.
The Projects 34 actor and fellow housing units, will be provided in addition to the
above-stated affordable units, thus delivering creative and effective solutions for affordable
arts housing without diminishing the citys resources for broader affordable housing programs.
10A DCMR 1409.3.
5.
Environmental Benefits
Pursuant to Section 2403.9(h) of the Zoning Regulations, certain aspects of a PUD

applications environmental management system are considered to be public benefits. The
Applicant is fully committed to providing a high-quality development that is sensitive to the
46
natural environment. The Applicant will implement a number of strategies to enhance the
sustainable nature of the Property and to promote a healthy, desirable, and comfortable lifestyle
that will benefit the Projects residents and minimize the buildings impact on the environment.
These sustainability features include a commitment to achieve Silver certification under the
LEED 2009 rating system as indicated on sheet 7.1 of Exhibit A.
In addition, the Projects location in a transit-rich, walkable area will reduce reliance on
private vehicles by the buildings residents, employees, and visitors. People traveling to the
Project will have a full array of convenient and efficient transportation options, thus reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and local pollution generated by vehicles. The Applicant will also
provide bicycle parking for residents, employees, and visitors to the building.
6.
Uses of Special Value and Revenue for the District
Under Section 2403.9(i), uses of special value to the neighborhood or the District of
Columbia as a whole are public benefits and project amenities. In this instance, the proposed
site has sat idle for six years, providing no benefit to the community or the District. The
development of the site will infuse new life into this portion of I Street SW, and will provide a
temporary financial benefit to the District through the development and construction process and
a permanent financial benefit to the District in the form of increased property taxes on the newly
improved site. Moreover, the addition of 102 new residences will serve to provide the District
with ongoing revenue as new residents will be able to call the Southwest home.
In addition, the Proposed Development will allow STC, a nationally-recognized cultural
resource to continue to operate and thrive in the city in which it was founded.
The
Comprehensive Plan is replete with recommendations focused on retaining artists and

encouraging the arts as a cultural amenity in the District. See, 10A DCMR 1400 et seq., Arts
and Culture Element. The Proposed Development addresses those goals by providing a home to
the STCs non-profit offices, rehearsal space, costume fabrication, and actor and fellow
housinguses that are currently scattered about the District. STC expends significant financial
and human resources in order to lease and manage multiple properties across the District. The
47
financial pressure has been particularly acute, as the real estate market in the District has become
increasingly competitive. Hence, the longevity and reliability of these leased buildings is in
doubt. STC is a District theatre, and the provision of a singular site for its non-profit offices,
rehearsal space, costume fabrication, and actor and fellow housing will help the District to retain
a prized art and cultural resource.
Furthermore, the Proposed Development will include educational studios that will permit
STC to increase its educational and community outreach. An example of the programs the
Applicant intends to run on-site include Camp Shakespeare, Master Acting Classes for teens and
adults, and Teacher Professional Development programs.
7. Other Public Benefits and Project Amenities
Pursuant to Section 2403.9(j), other ways in which the proposed PUD substantially
advances the major themes and other policies and objectives of any of the elements of the
Comprehensive Plan are considered public benefits and project amenities.
The Proposed
Development project advances numerous goals of the Comprehensive Plan through the provision
of robust and substantial community and District-wide benefits (Benefits Package). See
Benefits Package at Exhibit H. The Applicant is committed to building a development that
fosters an artistic community in the District. As such, the benefits package includes numerous
arts-related benefits for the Southwest community and District residents. For example, the
Applicant has agreed to support, financially and through participation, the SW ArtsFest, a
weekend of art-centered activities designed to encourage District residents to explore the
growing Southwest quadrant and its various art producers. In an effort to ensure the accessibility
of the arts programs organized by STC, the Applicant has agreed to provide scholarship
opportunities for up to 10, low-income children ages 5-17 to attend a full-day Shakespeare
Theatre summer camp for one or two weeks,. Currently, STC does not offer any programing to
elementary schools; however, because the Proposed Development abuts Amidon-Bowen
Elementary, STC will expand its programming to include the elementary school. Specifically,
STC will invite classes from Amidon-Bowen for annual tours of the Lansburgh Theatre, Sidney
Harman Hall, and the Proposed Development once it is completed. The goal of this educational
48
programming will be to inspire a love for the arts in young children and to expose them to the
behind the scenes aspects of theatre production most people do have the chance to experience.
In addition to the arts-related benefits, the Applicant is committed to being an environmental
steward in the community. As such, the Benefits Package includes a commitment to work with
the Friends of the Southwest Duck Pond on improvements to the Duck Pond, and to coordinate
with them for arts events at the Duck Pond. As this case moves forward, the Applicant will
continue to engage with these stakeholders in refining the Projects community amenities
package.
V.
COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

The proposed PUD and Zoning Map Amendment application is consistent with and
fosters numerous policies and action items enumerated in the Comprehensive Plan.
The
Comprehensive Plan includes recommendations for specific areas of the District, Area Elements,
which outline specific goals and needs that are unique and particular to different neighborhoods
and communities in the District. The Comprehensive Plan also includes District elements, which
apply to all District properties.
The purposes of the Comprehensive Plans District elements are to:
1) Define the requirements and aspirations of District residents, and
accordingly influence social, economic, and physical development;
2) Guide executive and legislative decisions on matters affecting the
District and its citizens;
3) Promote economic growth and jobs for District residents;
4) Guide private and public development in order to achieve District
and community goals;
5) Maintain and enhance the natural and architectural assets of the
District; and
49
6) Assist in the conservation, stabilization, and improvement of each

neighborhood and community in the District.
D.C. Code 1-306.01 (2006).
The Proposed Development significantly advances the purposes of the District-wide
elements and the Area Element by furthering the social and economic development of the
District through the redevelopment of an underutilized site into a new mixed-use complex with
approximately 136 residential units, arts-related uses, non-profit offices, educational space, and
numerous other public benefits.
A.
District -Wide Elements

1.
Land Use Element
The PUD project and Zoning Map Amendment application further the goals of the
following Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element policies.
Policy LU-1.4.3: Zoning of Infill Sites. Ensure that the zoning of vacant infill
sites is compatible with the prevailing development pattern in surrounding
neighborhoods. This is particularly important in single family and row house
neighborhoods that are currently zoned for multi-family development. 307.7.
Policy LU-2.1.1: Variety of Neighborhood Types. Maintain a variety of
residential neighborhood types in the District, ranging from low-density, single
family neighborhoods to high-density, multi-family mixed use neighborhoods.
The positive elements that create the identity and character of each neighborhood
should be preserved and enhanced in the future. 309.5.
Policy LU-2.2.4: Neighborhood Beautification. Encourage projects which
improve the visual quality of the Districts neighborhoods, including landscaping
and tree planting, facade improvement, anti-litter campaigns, graffiti removal,
improvement or removal of abandoned buildings, street and sidewalk repair, and
park improvements. 310.5.
Policy LU-2.3.4: Transitional and Buffer Zone Districts. Maintain mixed use
zone districts which serve as transitional or buffer areas between residential and
50
commercial districts, and which also may contain institutional, non-profit,

embassy/chancery, and office-type uses. Zoning regulations for these areas
(which currently include the SP-1 and SP-2 zones) should ensure that
development is harmonious with its surroundings, achieves appropriate height and
density transitions, and protects neighborhood character. 311.6.
The Project proposes to redevelop a property that was previously underutilized and has
sat unutilized since 2010. The Project will reinfuse life into this corner of Square 498, provide
housing near public transit, and continue the unique development pattern found in the Southwest
with the construction of a high-rise tower and low-rise fellow housing. The PUD project will
further improve the existing streetscape through landscaping, tree planting, and the addition of
visually stimulating artistic elements to the street level front faade and Shakespeare-inspired
courtyard and landscaping elements. Moreover, the development, as an SP-2-zoned project with
residential units and non-profit art related uses, provides the ideal transition between the highdensity PUD-approved, C-3-C development by Mill Creek Residential Trust, one block south of
the Property, and the low-density townhouse residential development north of the Property.
In addition to the above, the Proposed Development also aligns with other Land Use
Element goals. The Land Use Element encourages development near Metrorail stations as
anchors for economic and civic development (LU 1.3.1: Station Areas as Neighborhood
Centers), as the greatest opportunities for infill development and growth (LU 1.3.2:
Development around Metrorail Stations), and as pedestrian-oriented nodes (LU 2.4.5:
Encouraging Nodal Development). The Proposed Developments proximity to the Waterfront
Metrorail station (0.3 miles) and the LEnfant Metrorail Station (0.4 miles) perfectly represents
the sort of transit- and pedestrian-oriented infill development promoted by the Land Use
Element.
2.
Environmental Protection Element
The Comprehensive Plans Environmental Protection Element includes the following

policies furthered by this project:
51
Policy E-1.1.1: Street Tree Planting and Maintenance. Plant and maintain street trees
in all parts of the city, particularly in areas where existing tree cover has been reduced
over the last 30 years. Recognize the importance of trees in providing shade, reducing
energy costs, improving air and water quality, providing urban habitat, absorbing noise,
and creating economic and aesthetic value in the Districts neighborhoods. 603.4.
Policy E-1.1.3: Landscaping. Encourage the use of landscaping to beautify the city,
enhance streets and public spaces, reduce stormwater runoff, and create a stronger sense
of character and identity. 603.6.
Policy E-2.2.1: Energy Efficiency. Promote the efficient use of existing water supplies
through a variety of water conservation measures, including the use of plumbing fixtures
designed for water efficiency, drought-tolerant landscaping, and irrigation systems
designed to conserve water. 609.3.
Policy E-3.1.1: Maximizing Permeable Surfaces. Encourage the use of permeable
materials for parking lots, driveways, walkways, and other paved surfaces as a way to
absorb stormwater and reduce urban runoff. 613.2.
Policy E-3.1.2: Using Landscaping and Green Roofs to Reduce Runoff. Promote an
increase in tree planting and landscaping to reduce stormwater runoff, including the
expanded use of green roofs in new construction and adaptive reuse, and the application
of tree and landscaping standards for parking lots and other large paved surfaces. 613.3.
Policy E-3.1.3: Green Engineering. Promote green engineering practices for water and
wastewater systems. These practices include design techniques, operational methods, and
technology to reduce environmental damage and the toxicity of waste generated. 613.4.
Policy E-3.2.1: Support for Green Building. Encourage the use of green building
methods in new construction and rehabilitation projects, and develop green building
methods for operation and maintenance activities. 614.2.
The Proposed Development provides a quality LEED Silver building that includes green
roofs, lush landscaping, methods to reduce stormwater runoff, and green engineering practices,
and is thus fully consistent with the Environmental Protection Element and the policy goals listed
above.
3.
Urban Design Element
The Comprehensive Plans Urban Design element includes the following policies, which
are furthered by the PUD project and Zoning Map Amendment application.
52
Policy UD-2.2.1: Neighborhood Character and Identity. Strengthen the defining visual
qualities of Washingtons neighborhoods. This should be achieved in part by relating the
scale of infill development, alterations, renovations, and additions to existing
neighborhood context. 910.6.
Policy UD-2.2.5: Creating Attractive Facades. Create visual interest through welldesigned building facades, storefront windows, and attractive signage and lighting. Avoid
monolithic or box-like building forms, or long blank walls which detract from the human
quality of the street. (see Figure 9.12.) 910.12.
Policy UD-3.1.1: Improving Streetscape Design. Improve the appearance and identity of
the Districts streets through the design of street lights, paved surfaces, landscaped areas,
bus shelters, street furniture, and adjacent building facades. 913.8.
The superior architectural design and quality of materials used in the Project will set a
new standard in development for this section of I Street SW, while linking with the modern highquality architectural standard found one block south of the Property. The ground level window
art screens will activate the faade of the building and strengthen the I Street corridors
burgeoning artistic identity. Additionally, the landscaping and courtyard art installations will
enhance the pedestrian experience in the area.
In addition to the policies listed above, the Project will help to strengthen the
architectural quality of the immediate neighborhood by relating the Projects scale to the existing
neighborhood context, of both existing and approved development projects. See Policy U.D2.2.7: Infill Development. The Project is also consistent with the goals of Policy UD-3.2.5:
Reducing Crime Through Design, since the development will bring additional eyes and ears to
the street, as well as improved lighting, clear lines of sight, and visual access, all of which will
help minimize the potential for criminal activity in the immediate area.
4.
Arts and Culture Element
The Arts and Culture Element of the Comprehensive Plan recognizes the importance of
the arts to the District and identifies some of the unique challenges facing the art community.
The Arts and Culture Element is a guiding principle for the policies outlined in the
Comprehensive Plan. The Arts and Culture Element states in pertinent part:
53
The ability of arts organizations and artists to thrive in our city is dependent on
having suitable production, performance, and exhibition space. The required
facilities include studios, rehearsal halls, theaters and concert halls, dance
rehearsal and performance spaces, exhibition spaces and galleries, multipurpose
centers, classrooms, administrative offices, and art storage facilities, among
others. Many of these facilities are completely absent in large parts of the city,
especially in East of the River neighborhoods. Where they do exist, they may be
threatened by rising rents and redevelopment pressure. AC-1 Creating and
Enhancing Arts and Cultural Facilities. 1402.1.
It also states:
The city faces a persistent need for the retention and further development of
affordable neighborhood arts facilities.
A directed program of facility
development, maintenance, and expansion is needed to foster a more stable arts
community. AC-1.1 Expanding Neighborhood Arts and Cultural Facilities.
1403.1.
The above principles recognize and identify the unique challenges artist and art
organizations face in the District.
Particularly, as STC has personally experienced, it is
extremely challenging to find affordable space to operate in and utilize. The challenges the art
community faces in finding suitable space adds an additional layer of complexity in the attempts
of many District artists to establish or expand neighborhood arts and cultural facilities. The
proposed Project directly addresses the guiding principles above and furthers the policies listed
below.
Policy AC-1.1.2: Development of New Cultural Facilities. Develop new
neighborhood cultural facilities across the District, providing affordable space for
grass roots and community arts organizations. Provide technical and financial
assistance to organizations to help plan and build such facilities. 1403.3.
Policy AC-1.1.3: Distribution of Facilities. Promote improved geographic
distribution of arts and cultural facilities, including development of arts facilities
and venues east of the Anacostia River and in other parts of the city where they
are in short supply today. 1403.4.
Policy AC-1.1.5: Siting of Facilities. Support the siting of arts facilities in
locations where impacts upon nearby uses can be most easily managed. Give
preference to locations near public transit, or sites where shared parking facilities
54
are available. Conversely, ensure that appropriate parking and transit access
improvements are made when arts and cultural venues are developed. 1403.6.
Policy AC-1.1.6: Performance and Events in Non-Traditional Settings.
Encourage the provision of spaces for performances and art events in
neighborhood parks, community centers, schools, transit stations, residential
developments and public areas in private development. This can help reach new
audiences and increase access to the arts for people in all parts of the city.
1403.7.
Policy AC-3.1.1: Affordable Artist Housing. Include provisions for arts
professionals in the Districts affordable housing programs. 1409.4.
Policy AC-3.2.1: Promoting Cultural Amenities. Promote the development of
cultural amenities beyond the Mall in an effort to more fully capitalize on the
economic benefits of tourism for District residents, businesses, and
neighborhoods. 1410.4.
Policy AC-4.2.1: Private Sector Partnerships. Develop partnerships with the
private sector to encourage monetary and non-monetary support for the arts, as
well as sponsorships of arts organizations and events. 1413.4.
Policy AC-4.4.2: Partnerships with Educational Institutions. Strengthen
collaborations among artists, arts organizations, teachers, school administrators
and others to expand the resources of the arts community and broaden the reach of
arts and culture. 1415.4.
Policy AC-4.4.4: Participation of Artists. Support and increase the participation
of artists in the Districts arts education programs. 1415.6.
The Proposed Development embodies the goals and policies outlined in the Arts and
Culture Element. The Project, a joint initiative between a renowned District theatre company
and a private sector development partner, will provide STC with fellow and actor housing,
rehearsal studios, educational space, and non-profit office space. Arts and Cultural Elements
Policy and Action AC 1 and AC 1.1, referenced above, make clear that initiatives such as the
Development Project are needed to foster a more stable arts community. Furthermore, as a
part of the Proposed Development benefits package, STC will expand its educational outreach
programs to a local elementary school and financially support and participate in the annual SW
55
ArtsFest as a way to expose more community members to theatre in a nontraditional setting. The
Proposed Development is the embodiment of many of the Arts and Cultural Elements goals as
expands artistic space in the Southwest neighborhood, increases the artistic presence on I Street
SW, and increases arts awareness and education through its proposed programming.
5.
Other Elements
This PUD application is also consistent with policies in the Housing and Transportation
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Element calls for balanced growth, mixeduse development and for more even distribution of mixed-income housing across the District.
See H-1.1.3: Balanced Growth; H-1.1.4: Mixed Use Development; and H-1.2.3 Mixed Income
Housing. The Proposed Development advances those policies through the provision of a mixed
used residential development, which includes 9 new affordable housing units and 34 actor and
fellow housing units, which as AC-3.1.1: Affordable Artist Housing implies, is a type of
affordable housing.
The Transportation Element encourages pedestrian oriented development around transit
stations. See T-1.1.4: Transit-Oriented Development. As discussed above, the Proposed
Development is transit oriented and ideally situated with easy access to two Metrorail Stations.
B.
Compliance with Area Elements
The Property is located within the Lower Anacostia Waterfront/Near Southwest Area
Element. This Element recommends the development of new waterfront neighborhoods near the
Southwest Waterfront. One of the most notable recommendations for the Southwest Area is:
Policy AW-2.1.1: Mixed Use Development. Support the redevelopment of the
Southwest Waterfront with medium to high-density housing, commercial and
cultural uses, and improved open space and parking. The Future Land Use Map
shows high-density development and it is expected that the project will capitalize
on height opportunities to provide public spaces and, where appropriate, a mix of
medium development density in order to transition to the surrounding
neighborhoods. The development should be designed to make the most of the
waterfront location, preserving views and enhancing access to and along the
shoreline. 1911.7.
56
The Proposed Development furthers this policy goal. It will provide a transitional mixeduse development between the higher-density C-3-C to the south and the residential communities
to the north of the Property.
C.
Compliance with the Southwest Neighborhood Plan
As stated above, the SW Plan is a Small Area Plan that provides a framework for future
development in the Southwest. This plan reflects community aspirations, District-wide goals,
and market opportunities. The SW Plan is organized around a series of visions, including
continuing to serve as a model community for equity and inclusion, reinforcing the neighborhood
design as a Modernist Gem, providing a green oasis in the District, supporting the Southwest
as an arts and cultural destination, developing a thriving town center, optimizing the
development or redevelopment of District-owned parcels of land, and providing vibrant
pedestrian and other transportation connections that support an active community and attractive
environment. SW Plan, pages 5-8.
The SW Plan extends from South Capitol Street to Maine Avenue SW; from P Street SW,
north to the I-395 Freeway (Planning Area). SW Plan, page 11. The Planning Area is separated
into a focus area and a secondary area. The Property is a part of the Focus Area which contains
the Plans development opportunity sites, primary urban design issues and new development
context. Id. It should be noted, that the SW Plan does not include the Property in the secondary
area, where neighborhood conservation, neighborhood connectivity and sustainability are the
principal focus. Id.
57
The Proposed Development is specifically noted on page 97 of the SW Plan as a Key

Site; however, no specific recommendation or change to the Comprehensive Plan is made. The
Proposed Development is not inconsistent with the intentions stated in the SW Plan for this site
and furthers many of the specifically identified visions and Goals of the Southwest
Neighborhood.
1.
Southeastern University Site
The SW Plan states, [t]his site is a preferred location for an arts and cultural use as it
complements and augments the growing arts already in Southwest and further anticipated Plans
vision for cultural uses along Eye Street. The Proposed Development dedicates 35% of the
building to the arts and cultural use of STC. Moreover, the extensive public benefits include
educational and performing arts-related programs analogous to the prior institutional use. The
SW Plan notes, [t]he site itself is currently designated Institutional on the Comprehensive
Plan Future Land Use map which is in keeping with this historic educational and non-profit
uses. The proposed use will be less intensive than the 870 students and 140 staff that utilized
the SEU campus for 37 years.
The community expressed an understanding of the theaters need for additional space
and recognized the merits of having a world class theatre headquartered in Southwest. As
outlined in Section III.A herein, the Applicant has worked with the community over the past two
58
years to modify the height, massing, and design to be more compatible with the surrounding
vicinity.
The SW Plan does not make a recommendation for a land use designation change;
therefore, the Commission must reflect back to 10A DCMR 226(h) when evaluating a change
in use on an institutional site. As more specifically outlined above, the Proposed Development is
comparable in density or intensity to those in the vicinity and, as further illustrated below, is
consistent with the goals of the Small Area Plan. 10A DCMR 104.2 and 104.8.
2.
Vision and Goals: An Arts and Cultural Destination
As set forth in detail throughout this statement, the Proposed Development will further
the visions for the Southwest Neighborhood. In particular, the Proposed Development will
further the specific goals articulated in the SW Plan for the Southwest to become an art and
cultural destination. Those goals include building and marketing using existing assets and
institutions to reinforce the concept of an arts and cultural destination, strengthening I Street as
an arts and culture corridor, and growing the presence of the arts throughout the Southwest
quadrant. SW Plan, page 6.
With the above vision and goals in mind, the SW Plan specifically identifies the Property
as a Key Site and a preferred destination for an art-related use. The SW Plan states that, [t]he
Southeastern University site can be designated for redevelopment to bookend one side of the I
Street cultural corridor, remain sensitive to its context, and include an institutional/cultural
use and possibly artist housing. (emphasis added). Although the SW Plan does not designate a
change in the density or intensity of the Property, the Proposed PUD and Zoning Map
Amendment Application is appropriate for the site, as discussed at length above, and reflects the
SW Plans goal for the site. The Project furthers several of the arts and cultural goals for the
Southwest stated in the plan.
Goal: Strengthen I Street as a cultural corridor. SW Plan, page 6.

Goal: Grow the presence of the arts throughout the Southwest neighborhood. Id.
59
AC.5 Encourage the creation of incubator space for local arts organizations or
other creative entrepreneurs (e.g., web designers, film editing, production,
culinary space, etc.) or local business start-ups on the ground floors of new
buildings on M and I Streets. SW Plan, page 96.
3.
Design Guidelines
In addition to proposing a project that aligns with the preferred use for the
Property, the Project complies with the numerous Design Guidelines set forth in the SW
Plan.
Principle 1: Encourage a mix of building heights. Provide a massing and mix of defined
building heights which complement and uphold the current mixture of high-rise and lowrise buildings. Particularly on large sites, this mix should include the provision of
rowhouses and high-rise buildings, and avoidance of mid-rise building forms.
Principle 2: Achieve design excellence for high quality and timeless development.
Achieve high quality development and the creation of attractive buildings and landscapes
through design excellence by using distinguished architecture, durable high quality
materials and detailing, and advanced sustainable design.
Principle 3: Promote variation in building frontages along streets with continuous
massing. Promote cohesive building forms and design, while incorporating articulation in
the building and landscape design. This will ensure a pedestrian-scale of development
and lessen the perceived length of high-rise buildings or rowhouse groupings. Blank,
unarticulated walls should be avoided, particularly along streets and pedestrian ways
Principle 4: Enhance green space through landscaped perimeters and internal green or
amenity spaces. Support Southwests vibrant green character through the provision of
publicly visible landscaped perimeters; internal green or amenity spaces; and landscaped
setbacks appropriate to the streetscape, particularly for high-rise structures.
Principle 5: Incorporate sustainable building and site design. Employ a range of
innovative sustainable design strategies and building standards to promote a high
performing environment that encourages healthy living, energy efficiency, and
stormwater management.
Principle 6: Ensure parking is not a detractor. Locate vehicle parking underground, or in
above-grade structures that are visually buffered from the street and adjacent properties.
60
Services such as parking and loading access should avoid the interruption of street-facing
building fronts or communal open space
Principle 7: Maximize transparency and viability of ground floor uses along key
commercial corridors. For high-rise structures, provide vibrant ground-floor uses and
street-level design that promote pedestrian-oriented usage, particularly on M Street, 4th
Street and South Capitol Street. Southwest Plan, pages 81-84.
As discussed previously in this statement, the Proposed Project incorporates the SW
Plans design guidelines and clearly aligns with the SW Plans intent for development.
4.
Other SW Plan Goals
The Proposed Development also furthers other specific goals of the SW Plan:
GO.8 Increase the tree canopy in the Southwest Planning Area from 25 percent
to 37 percent with the addition of trees in all new developments, streetscape
improvements and potentially at existing parks, such as Lansburgh. The creation
of larger setbacks for new developments may allow for more tree planting
opportunities. Ensure that any diseased trees are removed and replaced at
appropriate times.
GO.11 Reduce stormwater runoff by transforming key areas of existing
impervious surfaces to pervious materials and encouraging bioretention and
landscaping.
GO.13 Maximize open spaces, vegetation and sustainable practices in new
developments achieved through Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). (See also
Design Guidelines on pages 81-83.)
The Proposed Development is an environmentally conscientious development with
thoughtful and lush greenspaces, including green roofs. Thus, the Proposed Development meets
all of the objectives listed above.
61
VI.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
The Applicant began its outreach to the Southwest Community six months before
acquiring the Property. Since April of 2014, representatives of STC and/or EDC have met with
the following organizations:
Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6D
Near Southeast-Southwest Community Benefits Coordinating Council
Southwest Neighborhood Assembly
Residents of Townhouse Management I and Townhouse Management IV
Waterfront Gateway Neighborhood Association

Additionally, the Applicant has held five meetings open to the public and advertised via
the ANC and SWNA, all of which were well attended. Finally, the Applicant conducted a
telephone town hall meeting, during which it provided an overview of the proposed development
and took questions from residents. The Applicant advertised this telephone town hall, via a
direct mail to local residents. The Applicant has attached a comprehensive list of community
meetings and outreach as Exhibit I.
VII.
CONCLUSION
In deciding a PUD, the Commission must judge, balance, and reconcile the relative value
of the project amenities and public benefits offered, the degree of development incentives
requested, and any potential adverse effects according to the specific circumstances of the case.
11 DCMR 2403.8. We respectfully submit that any potential adverse effects of the Proposed
Development are outweighed by the high-quality amenities of the Project, including but not
limited to, the provision of affordable housing in a transit rich area, and the construction of a
Silver LEED certified building that follows the high-low design guidelines of the SW Plan.
Further, the development incentives being requested by the Proposed Development are
conservative and do not attempt to maximize the massing incentives provided through the PUD
process.
62
THE
S
BARD
T
P L A N N E D
REDEVELOPMENT
W
U N I T
D.
C.
D E V E L O P M E N T
February 3, 2016
Owner
THE BARD, A JOINT DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN ERKILETIAN DEVELOPMENT

C O M P A N Y A N D T H E S H A K E S P E A R E T H E A T R E C O M P A N Y, L L C
Land Use Counsel
G R I F F I N , M U R P H Y, M O L D E N H A U E R , & W I G G I N S , L L P
Architect
S H A L O M B A R A N E S A S S O C I AT E S , P C
Landscape Architect
PARKER RODRIGUEZ INC

Traf fic Engineer
G O R O V E / S L A D E A S S O C I AT E S , I N C
Civil Engineer
BOHLER ENGINEERING
DRAWING INDEX
THE
DI AG R A M S & DE V E L O P M E N T DATA
1.1
1. 2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
DR AWING INDE X
AERIAL CONTE X T VIE W
NEIGHBORHOOD CIRCUL ATION
SITE PHOTOGR APHS
SITE PHOTOGR APHS
ZONE BOUNDARY SITE PL AN
NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING HEIGHT SITE PL AN
ZONING HISTORY
NEIGHBORHOOD DE VELOPMENT
PROJECT DE VELOPMENT
DE VELOPMENT HEIGHT
DE VELOPMENT DATA
SITE PL AN
SITE CIRCUL ATION DIAGR AM
COURTS PL AN
BLOCK ELE VATIONS
BLOCK SECTIONS
IMAGES
2.1
2. 2
2.3
2.4
AERIAL VIE W FROM NW

6TH AND H STREE T VIE W LOOKING SOUTH
6TH STREE T VIE W FROM NW
6TH AND E YE STREE T VIE W FROM SW
BUILDING PLANS
3.1
3. 2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
FLOOR PL AN - GROUND LE VEL

FLOOR PL AN - LE VEL 1.5
FLOOR PL AN - LE VEL 2
FLOOR PL AN - MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE
FLOOR PL AN - ROOF PL AN
FLOOR PL AN - LE VEL B1
FLOOR PL AN - LE VEL B2
BIKE PARKING - LE VEL B2
AFFORDABLE UNIT DISTRIBUTION
SHADOW STUDIES
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
LANDSCAPE
4.1
4. 2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
BU IL DING S EC T IO N S & E L E VAT IO N S
5.1
5. 2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
SECTIONS
SECTIONS
SECTION E
MATERIAL SELECTIONS
ELE VATIONS
ELE VATIONS
FACADE T YPE 1
FACADE T YPE 1
FACADE T YPE 2
FACADE T YPES 3 & 4
FACADE T YPES 3 & 4
FACADE T YPE 5
FACADE T YPE 6
FACADE T YPE 7
CIVIL DR AWINGS
6.1
6. 2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
E XISTING CONDITIONS PL AN
SITE /GR ADING PL AN
UTILIT Y PL AN
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT/GREEN ARE A R ATIO PL AN
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT NARR ATIVE
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PL AN
TRUCK TURNING MANEUVERS
REDEVELOPMENT
W a s h i n g t o n ,
PUBLIC L ANDSCAPE CONCEP T

COMPOSITE PL AN
GROUND LE VEL
COURT YARD L ANDSCAPE
COURT YARD MATERIAL SELECTIONS
6TH STREE T PARTERRE G ARDENS
E YE STREE T L ANDSCAPE
E YE STREE T ART PANELS
LE VEL 1 ROOF
LE VEL 4 ROOF
LE VEL 6 ROOF
LE VEL 7 ROOF
MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE ROOF
G AR SCORECARD
DRAWING INDEX
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
c 2016 Shalom Baranes A ssociates
7.1
LEED
LEED SCORECARD
shalom baranes associates
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.1
7TH STREET SW
G STREET SW
SW DUCK
POND
SW
ARENA
STAGE
K STREET SW
RE A
VE S
W
EN
AWA
AV
DEL
EYE STREET SW
3RD STREET SW
IN
4TH STREET SW
SITE
6TH STREET SW
H STREET SW
L STREET SW
WATERFRONT
METRO
M STREET SW
0 25 50
100
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
AERIAL CONTEXT VIEW

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1. 2
M
SMITHSONIAN
1
CAPITOL SOUTH
M
FEDERAL CENTER
M
LENFANT PLAZA
M M
1/2 MILE
1/4 MILE
395/695
3RD ST. SW
P6
G ST. SW
EYE ST. SW
E
AV
SW
WATERFRONT
M
M METRORAIL STOP
CAPITOL BIKESHARE
M ST. SW
METRO BUS
# CARSHARE LOCATION AND

NUMBER OF VEHICLES
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
NAVY YARD
M
REDEVELOPMENT
SOUTH CAPITOL STREET
AI
KEY
A42,
A48,
A46
V1
4TH ST. SW
7TH ST. SW
74, V1,
A42,
A48,
A46
6TH ST. SW
N E I G H B O R H O O D C I R C U L AT I O N
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
250
500
1000
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.3
1
2
1 6TH AND M STREET LOOKING NORTH
H
4T
W
.S
T
S

EYE
ST
.S
ST
.S

6T
3 EYE AND 4TH LOOKING WEST
4 4TH AND G STREET LOOKING SW
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
D . C .

ST. S 2 DUCK POND LOOKING NW
W
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.4
1 EYE AND MAKEMIE LOOKING NW

K ST.
SW
2
2 6TH AND K STREET LOOKING NORTH
6T
.S
ST

EYE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
3 EYE AND 6TH STREET LOOKING NE
REDEVELOPMENT
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
D . C .
SW
4 6TH AND H STREET LOOKING SOUTH
THE
ST.
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.5
R-5-B
R-5-B
R-5-C
7th Street SW
G Street SW
R-3
R-4
R-5-B
H Street SW
R-5-B
R-5-C
PROPOSED
SP-2 PUD
R-5-C
Eye Street SW
ai
R-3
R-5-D
W-1
R-5-D
R-5-A
awa
C-3-C
L Street SW
Del
C-3-C
C-3-C
3rd Street SW
6th Street SW
R-5-B
4th Street
SW
K Street SW
re A
ve S
W
ee
tr
ve
A
e
at
W
C-3-A
CR
R-5-B
C-3-A
S I T E B O U N D A RY
M Street SW
W-1
Z O N E B O U N D A RY
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
R-5-B
CURRENT PUD
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
R-3
R-5-D
R-3
R-5-D
ZONE BOUNDARY SITE PLAN

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
R-3
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.6
9 st
9 st
G Street SW
7th Street SW
6 st
3 st
3 st
3&4 st
9 st
H Street SW
3&4 st
3 st
3 st
3.5 st
4 st
4.5st
9 st
4st
6st
9 st
2 st
2.5 3.5 2.5 st

st st
6 st
7st
Eye Street SW
ai
M
10 st
8 st
13 st
9 st
8 st
13 st
9 st
8 ST
awa
9 st
K Street SW
3rd Street SW
8 ST
4th Street
SW
3 ST
88 ft
6th Street SW
10 st
L Street SW
Del
12 st
13 st
ee
tr
2 ST
69 FT
re A
ve S
W
10 st
ve
A
e
at
W
9 ST
9 st
11 st
11 st
M Street SW
B U I L D I N G S U N D E R 3 S T O RY S
B U I L D I N G S 6 - 1 2 S T O RY S
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING HEIGHT SITE PLAN

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.7
22
VE
Mixed
SE Land Use
ST
ST
M Stadium-Armory
19TH
ST
S o u Parks,
t h w Recreation,
e s t
W
s h Space
i n g t o n ,
andaOpen
A
4
6
5
7
D . C .
S PL SE
ST SE
L
INTERSTAT E
SE
18TH
17TH
14TH
13TH
12TH
ST SE
19TH
PE
NN
SY
LV
AN
IA
29 5
N
AW
G
L
R
S
I
FA P ST SE T S
E
A
OT
E
AV
10
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
ST
SE
22ND
16TH ST SE
ES
INN
ST SE
COS
T IA
CH AVE
OL
SO
N
S
SE
NI
SE
19TH
v
i
R
er
SE
SE
ST
O ST SE
TE
WA
SE
ST
ST
SE
PARSONS
N ST SE
10TH
AVE
SE
ST
SICARD
ZONING HISTORY
8
ND
ST
SE
ST
ST
16TH
ST
SE
SE
ST
ST
ST
ST
SE
SE
SE
ST
SE
ST
ST
11TH
10TH
8TH
7TH
15TH
SE
ST
ST
SE
ST
9TH
ST
ST
SE
SE
SE
SE
ST
6TH
SE
ST
5TH
4TH
SE
SE
SE
ST
SE
SE
AN A
SE
ST SE
R ESED E V E L O P M E N T
ND
SE
BARD
Institutional
AVE
SE
THE
Local
SE Public Facilities
SE
16TH
ST
A
OM
T
PO
Potomac
Ave
AVE
ST SE
15TH
ST Federal
SE
SE
SE
NE Production, Distribution, and Repair
ST
ST
SE
ST
ST
22
M Stadium
18TH
Water
SE
SE
AVE
17TH
Medium Density Commercial
20TH
ST
1ST
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
ST
AV
D intentional mix
A defining feature of the Southwest District is an
of moderate density and high density residential. The Design
Guidelines of the recently passed Southwest Plan encourage a mix
of high-rise and low-rise buildings, particularly on large sites, to
complement this existing design feature.
Institutional
Mixed Land Use
ST NE
O ST SE
SW
Moderate Density Commercial

C
2ND
SE
ST
HALF
SW
ST
SE
N PL SE
1ST
ETT
S
ONE BLOCK
ISAAC HULL AVE SE
CAN
AL
ST
26TH
NE
23RD
ST
Local Public Facilities
OMA
L AH
OK
21ST
17TH PL NE
ST
ST
Federal
ST
SE
SE
AVE
A
LI N
A RO
TINGEY
Production, Distribution, and Repair
NE
L ST SE
Yard
P ST SE
ST
I PL SE
Navy
NE
NE
ST
17TH ST NE
E ST NE
ST SW
ST High Density Commercial
SW
O
AVE
SE
SE
TH
SOU
Eastern
Market
High Density Commercial
SE
26TH
NE
4TH
PL N
E
24TH
ST NE
18TH
NE
High Density Residential
NE
ST
14TH PL NE
ST
NE
E
AV
ETT
S
RD
Medium Density Residential
F ST NE
AV
ST
Moderate Density
Residential
NE
ST
1ST ST
SE
ST
HALF ST
SW
A VE
ST SW
NE
ST
ING
3RD ST
ST
SW
DELAWA
RE
ST S
W
ST SW
6TH
3RD
ST
19TH
NE
2ND
IV
Y
SW
24TH ST NE
4TH
SW
RD
A
NE
ST
ST
Low Density Residential

BENN
NE
NE
NE H
NE
RD
ST
TAP
LES
AV
Medium Density Commercial
NE
SE
SE
ST SW
UR
EN
SB
BL
AD
ST
7TH
NE
ST
NE
16
TH
High Density Residential
ST
NE
NE
ST
HO
LB
RO
OK
1ST
RD
SW
ST
9TH
NE
AV
E
NE
AV
ST
Medium Density Residential
SE
SE
NE
ND ST
22
APITOL
NE
SE
N ST SE
Moderate Density Residential
ST
YOUN
ST
N ST SW
Low Density Residential
LIN
RO
INDEPENDENCE
A
ACH
US
SE
CA
ST
6
H ST S E 95
SE
AVE
MA
SS
E
AV
RD
ST
NE
Low Density Commercial
NE
NE
Map 7
Low Density Commercial
E
AV
SE
ST
ST SW
SE
I VE
F ST SE
SE
RD
SW
Moderate Density Commercial

ST MAP 7 - GENERAL
FUTURE
LAND USE
VICINITY MAP
I
N
NE
SW
NE
Map 7
CAPITOL
CRABTREE
E
AV
GALES
CRABTREE
Waterfront-SEU
LYMAN
PL NE
Comprehensive
Plan
LANG PL NE
EME ADOW
L ST NE
Future
Land Use
NE
ST
NE
SOUTH
ST
E
RD N
NST
E M
ST
NEST
ST
Z A LE
NE
SW
NE
GLE
EA
NE
NE
NE
ST
SW
PL
RD
ST
ST
E ST SW
RD
395
V IR G
Comprehensive
Plan
I NI A
ME ADOW
SW
Future
Land UseINTERSTATE
R ST NE
E
AV
GS
E ST SW
ST SE
E
RAND PL NE
INT ERSTA TE
ER
AT
W
AU
M
1/4 MILE
T ST NE
S ST NE
VET
Capitol South
H
RT
O
N
SE
A VE
O LI
Federal Center SW
ST
L'ENFANT PROMENADE SW
ST SW
VIRG
INIA
AVE
SW
M SW
E
JERS
12TH
C ST SW
NEW
TN
KS
ST
ST
L'Enfant
E
TN
Plaza
IE S
OK
WIC
FEN
NE
NE
SW
M Smithsonian
ST
Y
CK
NT U
KE
VE
DA
N
A
YL
AR
INDEPENDENCE AVE M
SW
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.8
EXCERPT FROM SOUTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN:
THE BARD COURTYARD ALONG 6TH STREET
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.9
VIEW F R O M M A K E M I E P L A C E S W L OOKING NORTHWEST
VIEW FROM EYE STREET SW LOOKING WEST
VIEW FROM 6TH STREET SW LOOK I N G S O U T H
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
FAR
FAR 6.50 4.63 4.49 4.09

ALLOWABLE APRIL
SP-2 (PUD)
2014
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
JUNE
2015
HEIGHT
900 + 186
UNIT
COUNT
183
AV E R A G E
UNIT SIZE
652
4.63
4.49
163,861 SF
900 + 186
177
652
4.09
149,298 SF
732 + 186
136
776
FEBRUARY
2016
REDEVELOPMENT
A PRIL 2014
J UNE 2015
F EB. 2016
GROSS FLOOR
AREA
169,070 SF
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.10
LEVEL 4
ROOF +4111
MECH. PENT.
ROOF +186
ABOVE 732
10 STORIES
1000
+186 P.H.
LEVEL 7
ROOF +732
LEVEL 6
ROOF +624
LEVEL 4
ROOF +4111
4 STORIES
400
3 STORIES
320
M.P. 230
2.5 STORIES
272
3.5 STORIES
318
3 STORIES
318
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT HEIGHT
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.11
ZONING TABULATIONS
DCMR
TITLE 11 ZONING
FAR
PROJECT DATA
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
R-3 (EXISTING)
402,531
GROSS FLOOR AREA
NONE PRESCRIBED
NONE PRESCRIBED
(FAR SF, NOTE 1)
SP-2
SP-2 PUD (DCMR CHAPTER 24)
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
6.0
6.5
TOTAL = 4.09
(NON-RESIDENTIAL = 3.5 MAX)
(NON-RESIDENTIAL = 4.5 MAX)
RESIDENTIAL = 3.60
NON PROFIT OFFICE = 0.49
218,856 SF
237,094 SF
TOTAL = 149,298 SF
(NON-RESIDENTIAL = 127,666 MAX)
(NON-RESIDENTIAL = 164,142 MAX)
RESIDENTIAL =131,273 SF
NON PROFIT OFFICE = 18,025 SF
RESIDENTIAL= 80%
SAME AS MATTER-OF-RIGHT
RESIDENTIAL= 77%
498
52
SP-2 PUD (PROPOSED)
36,476 SF RECORDED
36,485 SF MEASURED
NOTES
1
Gross Floor Area (GFA) includes a deduction of 2% for mechanical shafts, but does not include areas
for (1) bays projecting over the property line, (2) parking access ramps, and (3) spaces with structural
clearance less than 6'-6".
The proposed number of dwelling units is 136. The final dwelling unit count may vary by 10% per
flexibility requested. Proposed unit range = 126-148.
The proposed number of residential parking spaces is based on a unit total of 136. The final
residential parking count may vary by 10% per flexibility requested. Proposed residential parking
range = 32-37.
LOT OCCUPANCY
403, 532
(NIC GARAGE RAMP)(NOTE 9)
BUILDING HEIGHT
400, 530
40'-0
3 STORIES
90'-0
73'-2" (7TH FLOOR ROOF)

For Non Profit office and Educational uses less then 30,000 GSF none is required per section 2201.
PENTHOUSE AREA
411, 537
0.37 FAR
0.37 FAR
0.13 FAR (4,870 SF)
PENTHOUSE HEIGHT
530
20'-0"
20'-0"
18'-6"
Educational Program Parking 2 spaces for 3 teachers. 3 spaces required for 7 teachers.
Classroom Parking 1 space for each 10 classroom seats. 6 spaces required for 60 seats.
Non Profit Office Parking in excess of 2,000 sq ft, 1 for each space for each additional 1,800 sq ft.
16 spaces required for 31,690 sq ft of office.
1 space for every 600 sq ft. 9 spaces required for 5,200 sq ft of art studio space.
PENTHOUSE SETBACK
530
1:1 RATIO
1:1 RATIO
VARIES
RELIEF REQUESTED
Of the 34 spaces provided for non proffict office, art, and education uses, 11 are tandem spaces.
Ramp not included in building area, as it is below main floor. Per 11DCMR 534.4
ROW DWELLING, CHURCH OR

PUBLIC SCHOOL= 60%
ALL OTHER STRUCTURES= 40%
REAR YARD
404, 534
20'-0
2 1/2 IN/FT OF HT, 12'-0 MIN.

(15'-5" REQ'D AT 73'-2" HT)
SIDE YARD
405, 535
NONE REQUIRED
(EXCEPT AS NOTED IN DCMR 405.1,
405.2 AND 405.6)
NONE REQUIRED
IF PROVIDED= 2 IN/FT OF HT, 8'-0" MIN.
(11'-10" REQ'D AT 70'-2" HT) @ MAIN TOWER,
(8'-0" REQ'D AT 47'-3" HT) @ FELLOW HOUSING
COURTS
OPEN COURT
406, 536
WIDTH = 4 IN/FT OF HT
ONE FAMILY DWELLING = 6 FT MIN.
ALL OTHER STRUCTURES = 10 FT MIN.
NON - RESIDENTIAL USES

WIDTH = 3 IN/FT OF HT; 12 FT MIN.
RESIDENTIAL USES
WIDTH = 4 IN/FT OF HT; 15 FT MIN.
CLOSED COURT
406, 536
WIDTH = 4 IN/FT OF HT
ONE FAMILY DWELLING = 5 FT MIN.
ALL OTHER STRUCTURES = 15 FT MIN.
AREA = 2 X THE SQUARE OF THE

REQUIRED COURT WIDTH; 350 SF MIN.
NON - RESIDENTIAL USES

AREA = 2X THE SQUARE OF THE REQUIRED WIDTH; 250 SQ FT
MIN.
RESIDENTIAL
USES
2101, 506
LOADING
2201
GREEN AREA RATIO
3400
INCLUSIONARY ZONING
2600
BIKE PARKING
802
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
RESIDENTIAL
1 PER DU
NONE REQUIRED
NOT PROVIDED
OPEN COURT #1
WIDTH = 10'-0" (RELIEF REQUESTED )
AREA = 2X THE SQUARE OF THE REQUIRED WIDTH; 350 SQ FT

MIN.
CLOSED COURT #1: (IN LIEU OF REAR YARD)

WIDTH = 48'-0"
AREA = 2,571 SF
CLOSED COURT#1: WIDTH REQ'D =30'-8" AT 91'-8" HT

AREA REQ'D =1,881 SF
CLOSED COURT #2
WIDTH = 15'-0" (RELIEF REQUESTED )
AREA = 1,918 SF
CLOSED COURT#2: WIDTH REQ'D =21'-0" AT 62'-4" HT

AREA REQ'D =882 SF
PARKING
A COMPLIANT CLOSED COURT

(CLOSED COURT #1)
PROVIDED IN LIEU OF REAR YARD
20'-11" @ MAIN TOWER,

8'-1" @ ANNEX HOUSING
OPEN COURT#1: WIDTH REQ'D =24'-8" AT 73'-11" HT
THE
SQUARE:
LOT:
ZONE:
SITE AREA:
RESIDENTIAL
1 PER 4 DU
34 REQUIRED (NOTE 2)
RESIDENTIAL
36 (NOTE 3)
NON PROFIT OFFICE

16 REQUIRED (NOTE 6)
NON PROFIT OFFICE

16 (NOTE 8)
ART USE
9 REQUIRED (NOTE 7)
ART USE
9 (NOTE 8)
EDUCATION USE
9 REQUIRED (NOTE 5)
EDUCATION USE
9 (NOTE 8)
RESIDENTIAL
1 BERTH @ 55 FT DEEP
1 PLATFORM @ 200 SF
1 SERVICE/DELIVERY @ 20 FT DEEP
RESIDENTIAL
1 BERTH @ 30 FT DEEP
1 PLATFORM @ 100 SF
1 SERVICE/DELIVERY @ 20 FT DEEP
RELIEF REQUESTED
EDUCATION USE
NONE REQUIRED (NOTE 4)
EDUCATION USE
NONE PROVIDED
NON PROFIT OFFICE

NONE REQUIRED (NOTE 4)
NON PROFIT OFFICE

NONE PROVIDED
NONE REQUIRED
0.3
0.333 PROVIDED
NONE REQUIRED
RESIDENTIAL
1 PER 3 DU
45 LONG TERM
RESIDENTIAL
75 LONG TERM
SEE PAGE 3.14
REDEVELOPMENT
D E V E LO PM E N T DATA
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.12
(TWO WAY - 100 ROW)
6TH STREET SW
DRIVEWAY
AMIDON-BOWEN
PLAY FIELDS
NOTES:
1.
Interior partition locations, the
number, size and locations of units,
stairs and elevators are preliminary and
shown for illustrative purposes only.
Final layouts may vary.
2. Refer to Sheet 4.2 for landscape plan.
3. Refer to Sheet 3.10 for overall building
dimensions.
4. Flexibility is requested to make
refinements to parking and loading
configurations, including layout, so
long as the required parking and
loading complies with the size, location,
access, maintenance and operation
requirements of DCMR 11.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
EYE STREET SW
(TWO WAY - 90 ROW)
REDEVELOPMENT
SITE PLAN
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
20
40
80
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.13
PARKING/LOADING
ENTRANCE
BIKE
RACKS
6TH STREET SW
(TWO WAY - 100 ROW)
STC
ENTRANCE
AMIDON-BOWEN
PLAY FIELDS
NOTES:
1.
BIKE
RACKS
TO WATERFRONT
METRO STATION
PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL PATH

dimensions.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
RESIDENTIAL
ENTRANCE
(TWO WAY - 90 ROW)
BIKE LANE
REDEVELOPMENT
BIKE LANE
EYE STREET SW
S I T E C I R C U L AT I O N D I AG R A M
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
20
40
80
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.14
6TH STREET SW
(TWO WAY - 100 ROW)
AMIDON-BOWEN
PLAY FIELDS
NOTES:
1.
dimensions.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
EYE STREET SW
(TWO WAY - 90 ROW)
REDEVELOPMENT
COURTS PLAN
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
20
40
80
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.15
BLOCK ELEVATION ALONG 6TH STREET SW
50
200
100
6TH STREET SITE ELEVATION

100' = 1"
BLOCK ELEVATION ALONG EYE STREET SW
50
200
100
EYE STREET SITE ELEVATION

100' = 1"
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
B LO C K E L E VAT I O N S
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.16
BLOCK SECTION ALONG EYE STREET SW
50
200
100
W-E SITE SECTION LOOKING SOUTH

100' = 1"
BLOCK SECTION ALONG 6TH STREET SW
50
200
100
E-W SITE SECTION LOOKING NORTH

100' = 1"
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
BLOCK SECTIONS
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
1.17
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
AERIAL VIEW FROM NW

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
2 .1
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
6TH AND H STREET VIEW LOOKING SOUTH

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
2.2
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
6TH STREET VIEW FROM NW

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
2.3
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
6TH AND EYE STREET VIEW FROM SW

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
2.4
(TWO WAY - 100 ROW)
6TH STREET SW
STC
ENTRANCE
NOTES:
1. Interior partition locations, the number, size
and locations of units, stairs and elevators are
preliminary and shown for illustrative purposes
only. Final layouts may vary.
NOTES:
Sheet 4.2 for landscape plan.
2.
Refer to
1. Interior
partition
number,
size
3.
Refer to
Sheetlocations,
3.10 for the
overall
building
dimensions.
only.
Final layouts
may vary.
4.
Flexibility
is requested
to make refinements
to parking and loading configurations,
2. Refer to layout,
Sheet 4.2
landscape
including
soforlong
as theplan.
required
parking and loading complies with the size,
3. Refer access,
to Sheetmaintenance
3.10 for overall
building
location,
and operation
dimensions. of DCMR 11.
requirements
KEY
RESIDENTIAL (MARKET)
RESIDENTIAL CIRCULATION /
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC NON-PROFIT OFFICE
STC HOUSING
RESIDENTIAL
ENTRANCE
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
EYE STREET SW
BUILDING SERVICES
(TWO WAY - 90 ROW)
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - GROUND LEVEL

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .1
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PL A N - LE VEL 1.5

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.2
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.3
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.4
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.5
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.6
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.7
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.8
NOTES:
dimensions.
KEY
Mechanical Mezzanine
COMMON
Level
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3.9
(TWO WAY - 100 ROW)
6TH STREET SW
NOTES:
3. Flexibility is requested to make refinements
including layout, so long as the required
location, access, maintenance and operation
4. Building heights are taken from the
measuring point on 6th Street (MP=+23.00).
EYE STREET SW
(TWO WAY - 90 ROW)
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - ROOF PLAN

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
16
32
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .10
NOTES:
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B1

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .11
PARKING NOTES:
1. The total number of Residential parking
spaces is based on a unit total of 136.
2. The final dwelling unit count may vary by
10% per flexibility requested. Proposed unit
range = 126-148.
3. The final residential parking count may vary
by 10% per flexibility requested. Proposed
residential parking range = 32-37.
STC Parking
Use
Non Profit Office
Education
Art Space
Totals
Zoning Compliant Parking
NOTES:
Handicap (HC) *6 Compact (C) Standard (S)

0
16
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
34
0
Total

34

Residential Parking
Totals
TOTAL
3
3
17
17
16
16
36
70
3. Parking space sizes:

Handicap = 9x19
Compact = 8x16
Standard = 9x19
4. Above 40% of required parking may be
compact spaces, relief requested.
5. Bicycle Parking detailed page 3.13
6. Handicap Parking includes one van
accessible space
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B2

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .12
B2 - LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING
8
N
BIKE PARKING
Required Provided
Residential
45
75
NOTES:
3. Standard Bicycle space = 2x6
4. Stacked Bicycle parking indicated in diagram.
5. Short Term parking provided at grade.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
BIKE PARKING - LE VEL B2

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .13
Level 1
Level 1.5
Level 2
Level 03
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 07
NOTES:
9 affordable units shown. Affordable unit mix
reflects approximate range in proportion to
market unit mix.
The designation of units for affordable housing
is schematic and intended to show general
distribution.
Affordable Unit Distribution
Total GSF
UNITS
Unit Mix
Total Market Rate Residential

8% Inclusionary Zoning
Actors Housing
TOTAL
87,952 SF
7,648 SF
33,710 SF
128,710 SF
93
9
34
136
Total Market Rate Residential

8% Inclusionary Zoning
Actors Housing
TOTAL UNITS
Studio 1 BR
18
2
3
2 BR 3 BR 4 BR
51
5
24
19
2
2
5
0
0
0
0
5
TOTAL
93
9
34
136
Final locations will be determined upon further

dwelling unit layout study as part of the final
design.
KEY
RESIDENTIAL (AFFORDABLE)
STC HOUSING
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
AFFORDABLE UNIT DISTRIBUTION

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .14
MARCH 21 & SEPTEMBER 21
9 AM
12 PM
3 PM
JUNE 21
9 AM
12 PM
3 PM
DECEMBER 21
9 AM
12 PM
3 PM
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
SHADOW STUDIES
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
3 .15
approachability
points of
contact
access
arts
corridor
urban
theatre
STAGE +
MANUSCRIPT
ENTREE
introduction
into
a timeless world
entry
courtyard
access
shakespeare
re-live
admittance
symbolism
allusion
puns
foil
DUALITY
translucent
obscure
building
drama
iconic
dramatic
irony
vitrine
BUILDS
INTRIGUE
INVITES
EXPLORATION
silhouette
T h e p u b l i c l a n d s c a p e a l o n g 6 t h a n d Eye S t r e e t i s a n o p p o r t u n i t y to b r i n g p a s s i ve a n d a c t i ve a c c e s s to S h a ke s p e a r e . To f a c i l i t a te g e n e r a l e n t r e i n to t h i s t i m e l e s s wo r l d, t h e
6th Street courtyard and Eye Street arts corridor frontage are key areas in the landscape design. The design of these spaces highlights two motifs: the manuscript and the
stage. Shakespeares ar t endures through written word, in his manuscripts, and is reimagined through per formed works on stage. Therefore, these central themes are pulled
into the framework of the landscape design. Many of Shakespeares works have a strong sense of duality in their characters, setting and themes. This subtle and multi-faceted
likeness is brought into the landscape to build intrigue and invite exploration.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
PUBLIC LANDSCAPE CONCEPT : SHAKESPEAREAN SHADOW

D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .1
6TH STREET
EYE
STREET
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
32
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
COMPOSITE PLAN
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.2
PARTERRE
GARDENS
3 BIKE
RACKS
TEXTURED PAVING
FOLDED SEATING
EXTRUDED
6TH STREET
PLANTERS
2 BIKE
RACKS
KEY PLAN
EYE
STREET
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
32
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
GROUND LEVEL
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.3
The entry courtyard features a linear paving module with in-grade lights and textured patterning on the paving similar to a watermark. This watermark detail will only reveal
itself as pedestrians are close up while walking over the paving. The paving carpets the courtyard and seamlessly continues up into a folded bench feature. The lighter paving
is in contrast to dark stone plinth planters. These monolithic pieces are reminiscent of stage sets atop a manuscript and appear to be extruded from the base of the building,
like a shadow. An etched ar t panel frames the entr y to the building and relates to the fins in the architecture. This ar t panel will have a Shakespeare graphic element, such
as the quill example in the above graphic.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
C O U R T YA R D L A N D S CA PE
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.4
NOTES:
CONCRETE PAVING
STONE
LINEAR LIGHT BANDS
1. Flexibility is requested to vary the final selection of exterior

materials within the color ranges and general material types
proposed, based on availability at the time of construction
without reducing the quality of materials
2. Flexibility is requested to make minor refinements to
exterior details and dimensions, to comply with the building
codes or that are otherwise necessary to obtain a final
building permit.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
M AT E R I A L S E L EC T I O N S
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.5
The plantings at the base of the building are organized into small
scale
parterre
gardens
that
respond
to
the
size
and
planting
style of the residences across 6th Street. The parterre gardens

consist of low evergreen hedges interplanted with ornamental
grasses,
groundcovers
and
perennials.
The
lush
6th
Street
streetscape is very pedestrian friendly and context sensitive.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
6TH STREET PARTERRE GARDENS

D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.6
Within the planting beds along the Eye Street landscape, etched transparent panels highlight Shakespeare and his theatrical works depicting imagery and quotations. This
artistic treatment is incorporated in panels on the glazing of the building as well so that the streetscape and architecture are integrated. Raised planters and evergreen
sculpted hedges are continued in a larger module along the more public Eye Street frontage.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
EYE STREET LANDSCAPE

D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.7
Staggered art panels peel back from the building facade, populating the Eye Street streetscape with educational and artistic imagery and quotations pertaining to Shakespeare
and his timeless works. As you walk along Eye Street, the translucent and layered nature of the panels creates an intriguing and dynamic display. Character silhouet tes,
Shakespeares por trait and quotations all overlap between the panels and building.
NOTES:
1. Flexibility is requested to vary
the final selection of art panel
materials, imagery and quotations
within the general material types
proposed.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
E YE STREET ART PANELS

D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.8
GREEN
ROOF
KEY PLAN
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 1 ROOF
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4.9
GREEN
COLOR BLOCK
ROOF
PLANTINGS
PERGOLA
FRAME
ORNAMENTAL
TREES
GREEN
ROOF
KEY PLAN
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 4 ROOFS
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .10
ORNAMENTAL
TREES
GREEN
ROOF
PERGOLA
FRAME
EQUIPMENT
ROOM
SHALLOW SUN
SHELF POOL
STAIR
TOWER
VINES ON
PERGOLA
FRAME
KEY PLAN
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 6 ROOF
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .11
PLANTERS
SYNTHETIC
TURF
SYNTHETIC
TURF
FOUNTAIN
KEY PLAN
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 7 ROOF
D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .12
GREEN ROOF
KEY PLAN
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
16
landscape
REDEVELOPMENT
MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE ROOF

D . C .
February 03, 2016
sba project# 14105
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .13
enter sq ft
Address
Green Area Ratio Scoresheet
501 Eye Street
Ward
Lot
6
Other / BZA Order
Lot size (enter this value first) *
52
498
enter sq ft of
lot
multipli
36,476
SCORE
Landscape Elements
A
Square
Square Ft.
Zoning District
Factor
Landscaped areas with a soil depth of less than 24"
0.3
Landscaped areas with a soil depth of 24" or greater
0.6
Bioretention facilities
0.4
Groundcovers, or other plants less than 2' tall at maturity
0.2
Plants, not including grasses, 2' or taller at maturity - calculated
Tree canopy for all new trees 2.5" to 6" diameter
1,353
12177
0.3
enter sq ft
Permeable paving over at least 6" and less than 24" of soil or gravel
Permeable paving over at least 24" of soil or gravel
Other
27
Enhanced tree growth systems***
Renewable energy generation
1350
0.5
0
sub-total of sq ft =
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
23,720
Bonuses
enter sq ft
0.6
Native plant species
0.7
Landscaping in food cultivation
0.7
Harvested stormwater irrigation
or larger or equivalent - calculated at 600 sq ft per tree
0
enter sq ft
0.1
0.1
12,483
enter sq ft
Green Area Ratio numerator =

enter number of trees
Tree canopy for preservation of all existing trees 18" to 24" dia.
Approved water features
enter sq ft
675.0

Tree canopy for preservation of existing tree 12" to 18" diameter
0.4
enter sq ft
Tree canopy for preservation of existing tree 6" to 12" diameter
0
enter sq ft
or equivalent - calculated at 250 sq ft per tree
8,154.4
Permeable Paving***
3,653.1
Tree canopy for new trees 6" diameter or larger
0.8
enter sq ft
Plantings (credit for plants in landscaped areas from Section A)
10,193
Over at least 8" of growth medium
at 9 sq ft per plant (typically planted no closer than 18" on center)
Landscaped areas (select one of the following for each area)
enter number of plants
0.6
enter sq ft
Total
enter sq ft
Over at least 2" and less than 8" of growth medium
0.342
enter sq ft
enter sq ft
enter sq ft
0.6
Vegetated or "green" roofs
SP-1, SP-2
enter sq ft
Vegetated wall, plantings on a vertical surface
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.6
*** Permeable paving and structural soil together may not qualify for more than one third of the Green Area Ratio score.
Total square footage of all permeable paving and enhanced tree growth

Tree canopy for preservation of all existing trees 24" diameter
DDOE/WPD 06/2014
enter sq ft
Vegetated wall, plantings on a vertical surface
Vegetated or "green" roofs

enter sq ft
Over at least 2" and less than 8" of growth medium
Over at least 8" of growth medium
enter sq ft
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s D
t
10,193
REDEVELOPMENT
W a s hPaving***
i n g t o n ,
Permeable
D . C .
0.8
February 03, 2016
GAR SCORECARD
sba project# 14105
enter sq ft
Permeable paving over at least 6" and less than 24" of soil or gravel
0.4
landscape
8,154.4
PARKER RODRIGUEZ
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
4 .14
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
NOTES:
SECTION A
1. Building heights are taken from the measuring

point on 6th Street (MP=+23.00). Refer to sheet
3.1 for measuring point location.
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
SECTION B
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
SECTIONS
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
16
32
N
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .1
T.O. MECH. PENTHOUSE

91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
LEVEL 4 ROOF
4111
NOTES:
SECTION C

T.O. MECH. PENTHOUSE

91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
KEY
LEVEL 4 ROOF
4111
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
SECTION D
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
SECTIONS
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
16
32
N
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.2
NOTES:
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
E
KEY
COMMON
STC EDUCATIONAL
STC ART STUDIO
STC HOUSING
STC CIRCULATION
PARKING
BUILDING SERVICES
16
32
N
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
SECTION E
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.3
FIBER CEMENT PANEL

- WHITE
FIBER CEMENT PAN

- GREY BLEND
CEMENT PANEL 1A FIBER

WHITE AND OFF WHITE BLEND
PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL

-WHITE
FIBER CEMENT PANEL

- GREY 1
FIBER CEMENT PANEL

- GREY 2
FIBER CEMENT PANEL

- WHITE BLEND

- GREY 1

- GREY 2
PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL GOLD
NOTES:
1. Flexibility is requested to vary the final
selection of exterior materials within the color
ranges and general material types proposed,
based on availability at the time of construction
2. Flexibility is requested to make minor
refinements to exterior details and dimensions,
including belt courses, sills, bases, cornices,
railings and trim, or any other changes to
comply with the building codes or that are
otherwise necessary to obtain a final building
permit.
10
THE
PAINTED METAL
PROFILE PANEL - GREY
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
11
REDEVELOPMENT
MANGANESE
IRONSPOT BRICK
12
STONE BASE
- MEDIUM GREY
M AT E R I A L S E L EC T I O N S
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
13
CONCRETE BASE
- LIGHT GREY
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.4
MATERIAL KEY
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
10
GLASS RAILING
1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE

1A FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE AND OFF WHITE
BLEND
2 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - GREY 1
4 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE BLEND
5 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - GREY BLEND
6 PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL - WHITE
7 PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL - GREY 1
9 PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL - GOLD
10 PAINTED METAL PROFILE PANEL - GREY
11 MANGANESE IRONSPOT BRICK
12 STONE BASE - MEDIUM GREY
13 CONCRETE BASE - MEDIUM GREY
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 4 ROOF
41-11
6
SPANDREL GLASS
1
BUTT-GLAZED
CURTAIN WALL
SYSTEM
FACADE TYPE 1
(REFER TO SHEETS 5.7-5.8)
12
FACADE TYPE 7
(REFER TO SHEETS 5.14)
South Elevation
NOTES:
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
PAINTED METAL
LOUVERS
1
8
2
1
8
1
2
5
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
10
1
9
7
STOREFRONT
WINDOW SYSTEM
WITH NANA WALL
PAINTED ALUMINUM
TRIM
3
3
5
7
9
7
1
1
PAINTED ALUMINUM TRIM

7
LEVEL 4 ROOF
41-11

permit.
4. For material images refer to page 5.4
11
GRADE LINE AT NORTH

PROPERTY LINE
North Elevation
NORTH ELEVATION
FACADE TYPE 6
(REFER TO SHEET 5.13)
42 TEXTURED CONCRETE WALL

AT NORTH PROPERTY LINE
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
1/32" = 1'-0"
REDEVELOPMENT
E L E VAT I O N S
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
16
32
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.5
MATERIAL KEY
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE

1A FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE AND OFF WHITE
BLEND
4 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - WHITE BLEND
5 FIBER CEMENT PANEL - GREY BLEND
6 PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL - WHITE
9 PAINTED ALUMINUM PANEL - GOLD
10 PAINTED METAL PROFILE PANEL - GREY
11 MANGANESE IRONSPOT BRICK
12 STONE BASE - MEDIUM GREY
13 CONCRETE BASE - MEDIUM GREY
10
PAINTED METAL LOUVER
8
STOREFRONT WINDOW
SYSTEM WITH NANA WALL
PAINTED METAL TRIM

LEVEL 4 ROOF
41-11
5
1
3
6 T H
6
SPANDREL GLASS
BUTT-GLAZED CURTAIN
WALL SYSTEM
S T R E E T
12
FACADE TYPES 3 & 4

(REFER TO SHEET 5.10-5.11)
42 TEXTURED
CONCRETE
WALL AT NORTH
PROPERTY LINE
9
6
FACADE TYPE 2
West Elevation
STOREFRONT
WINDOW SYSTEM
BUTT-GLAZED
STOREFRONT
WINDOW SYSTEM
PAINTED METAL LOUVER

1
8
10
2
8
T.O. PENTHOUSE
91-8
MAIN ROOF
73-2
LEVEL 6 ROOF
62-4
1
7
LEVEL 4 ROOF
41-11
NOTES:
permit.
PAINTED
METAL TRIM
5
7
11
13
FACADE TYPE 5
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
E L E VAT I O N S
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
East Elevation
42 TEXTURED
CONCRETE WALL
AT PROPERTY LINE
16
32
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.6
2
7
6
NOTES:
permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 1
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.7
NOTES:
permit.
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 1
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.8
10
NOTES:

permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 2
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5.9
3
5
3
TYPE 3
1
5
NOTES:
1
7
11
12

permit.
0
TYPE 4
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 3 & 4

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .10
TYPE 3
TYPE 4
NOTES:
permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 3 & 4

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .11
5
2
11
NOTES:
permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 5
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .12
5
1
1
3
3
1
13
NOTES:
permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 6
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .13
8
7
1A
11
NOTES:
permit.
0
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
FACADE T YPE 7
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
5 .14
DUE EAST 280.00'
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
6TH STREET, S.W.
DUE SOUTH 44.00'

LOD
LOD
DUE WEST 145.00'
LOD
DUE SOUTH 178.93'
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD = 1.07 AC
(46,934 SF)
REFERENCES:
A.
BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY: ENTITLED: "BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC

SURVEY, ERKILETIAN, 501 I STREET, S.W. LOT 52 SQUARE 498, DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA", PREPARED BY: BOHLER ENGINEERING, PROJECT NUMBER: DC132204,
DATED: 3/25/14.
B.
DIGITAL ARCHITECTURAL FILES: ENTITLED: "Ground Level.DWG", PREPARED BY: SHALOM

BARANES, DATED: 01/05/16.
C.
DIGITAL LANDSCAPE FILES: ENTITLED: "PRI-Base Ground.DWG", PREPARED BY: PARKER

RODRIGUEZ, DATED 01/05/16.
LOD
LOD
LOD
1. THE PLAN IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION
LOD
N0000'00"E 222.93'
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
2. LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. ALL LOCATIONS AND SIZES
ARE BASED ON UTILITY MARK OUTS, ABOVE GROUND STRUCTURES THAT WERE VISIBLE &
ACCESSIBLE IN THE FIELD, THE MAPS AS LISTED IN THE REFERENCES AVAILABLE AT THE
TIME OF THE SURVEY, AND INFORMATION FROM DC WATER COUNTERMAPS. AVAILABLE
AS-BUILT PLANS AND UTILITY MARK OUT DOES NOT ENSURE MAPPING OF ALL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES. BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION IS TO BEGIN, ALL
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOULD BE VERIFIED AS TO THEIR LOCATION, SIZE, AND TYPE BY
THE PROPER UTILITY COMPANIES.
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
I STREET, S.W.
LOD
DUE WEST 135.00'
20
40
1"= 40'
THE
BARD
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
S o u t h w e s t
EX. CONDITIONS PLAN
C1
EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6 .1
PROJECT NARRATIVE:
PROP. ELEC.
VAULTS
LIMITS OF SUBSURFACE
BUILDING
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
16
15
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
PROP. COVERED
GARAGE ENTRANCE
LOD
GRADING NARRATIVE
THE PROPOSED GRADING WILL HONOR THE EXISTING
DRAINAGE PATTERNS. INLETS WILL BE USED TO SAFELY
CONVEY RUNOFF. EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION OF THESE
STRUCTURES WILL BE DETERMINED WITH FINAL SITE
DESIGN. THE PROJECT WILL TIE INTO THE EXISTING
GRADES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE BASED ON
FINAL ARCHITECTURE. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS
HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED AT THIS TIME.
NOTES:
23
1.
CONTRACTOR IS TO MAINTAIN CURB AND

GUTTER/STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS
ON 6TH AND I STREET, S.W..
2.
FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN IS TO BE

PROVIDED BY BOHLER ENGINEERING.
LOD
LOD
COURTYARD
196.1'
LOD
21.6'
30'
LOD
135'
115'
LOD
LOD
6TH STREET, S.W.
LOD
LOD
18
17
LOD
19
20
21
22
LOD
BUILDING AT PROPERTY LINE
LOD
24
6'
R
PROP. BIKE RACK

(TYP.)
LOD
R
6'
LOD
LOD
APPROX.
LOCATION
PROP.
CISTERN (IN
GARAGE
BELOW)
THE PROJECT INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NON

PROFIT OFFICE/EDUCATIONAL/ART-USE/RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING WITH UNDERGROUND PARKING AND SITE
AMENITIES. THE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE DOMESTIC
WATER, FIRE, SANITARY SEWER, AND STORM DRAIN
CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITY MAINS LOCATED WITHIN
THE 6TH STREET, SW, AND I STREET, SW, PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE PROJECT PROPOSES THE USE OF A
CISTERN AND VARIABLE DEPTH GREEN ROOFS TO MEET THE
STORMWATER RETENTION VOLUME (SWRv) REQUIREMENTS
AND THE GREEN AREA RATIO (GAR) REQUIREMENTS.
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LEGEND
LOD
ACCENT PAVEMENT
(ENTRANCE)
D
LO
PROP. CONTOUR
15
'R
PROP. ADA
RAMPS
ACCENT PAVEMENT
(COURTYARD)
127'
LOD
8'
22
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
PROP. STREETLIGHT
(TYP.)
I STREET, S.W.
EX. CONTOUR
LOD
PROP. BIKE RACK

(TYP.)
20.9'
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
XX
XX
LOD
0
20
40
1"= 40'
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
SITE/GRADING PLAN
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
C2
SITE/GRADING PLAN
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6.2
PROP. ELEC.
VAULTS
BUILDING
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
BUILDING AT PROPERTY LINE
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
6TH STREET, S.W.
LOD
LOD
APPROX.
LOCATION
PROP.
CISTERN (IN
GARAGE
BELOW)
LOD
LOD
F
W
PROP. COVERED
GARAGE ENTRANCE
LOD
LOD
UTILITY KEYNOTES
LOD
LOD
COURTYARD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
PROP. WATER SERVICE (WATER METER TO BE

LOCATED WITHIN GARAGE)
PROP. FIRE SERVICE
PROP. SANITARY SERVICE
PROP. STORM LATERAL
PROP. STORM INLET (INTERIOR BLDG CONNECTION)
LOD
LOD
UTILITY NARRATIVE
4
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
LOD
THE PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES CONSTRUCTION

OF NEW UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVICE THE
DEVELOPMENT. EXISTING WATER MAINS, SANITARY
SEWER MAINS, AND STORM SEWER MAINS ARE
AVAILABLE TO SERVE THE SITE AS WELL AS
COMMUNICATION LINES, GAS MAINS, AND ELECTRIC
SERVICE. PROPOSED UTILITY LATERALS SHOWN
HEREON ARE APPROXIMATE. FINAL LOCATIONS OF
LATERALS AND CONNECTIONS WILL BE DETERMINED
DURING THE FINAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING AND
ASSOCIATED UTILITY ROOM LOCATIONS AND POINTS
OF CONNECTION.
LOD
I STREET, S.W.
LOD
20
40
1"= 40'
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
UTILITY PLAN
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
C3
UTILITY PLAN
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6.3
LEGEND
DENOTES AT GRADE GREEN ROOF
BUILDING
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
DENOTES 5TH FLOOR GREEN ROOF

LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
18
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
DENOTES PENTHOUSE 1 GREEN ROOF
DENOTES PENTHOUSE 2 GREEN ROOF
4
11
PROP. COVERED
GARAGE ENTRANCE
LOD
DENOTES CORRESPONDING GREEN

ROOF TABULATION IN GREEN ROOF
TABLE (SHEET C6)
LOD
LOD
NOTE: REMAINING ROOF AREA AND COURTYARD AREA

(NOT INCLUDING GREEN ROOF ITSELF OR AREA
DRAINING TO THE GREEN ROOF) WILL DRAIN TO
THE CISTERN.
11
10
DENOTES ANNEX GREEN ROOF

#
LOD
COURTYARD
DENOTES 7TH FLOOR GREEN ROOF
LOD
LOD
LOD
16
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
SUMMARY
LOD
6TH STREET, S.W.
LOD
BUILDING AT PROPERTY
LINE
5
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
APPROX.
LOCATION
PROP.
CISTERN (IN
GARAGE
BELOW)
DENOTES 2ND FLOOR GREEN ROOF
12
THE VOLUME REQUIRED TO BE RETAINED ON-SITE (SWRV) IS

EQUAL TO APPROXIMATELY 3,465 CUBIC FEET. THE VOLUME
REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROW WILL BE DETERMINED ONCE
STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN FINALIZED.
LOD
LOD
2
17
14
GREEN ROOF AREAS LOCATED ON VARIOUS LEVELS OF THE

PROPOSED BUILDINGS AS WELL AS A RAINWATER
HARVESTING CISTERN WILL BE USED TO SATISFY THE
ON-SITE
RETENTION
VOLUME.
SEE
STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT NARRATIVE ON SHEET C6 FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION AND CALCULATIONS.
13
LOD
LOD
15
15
15
D
LO
LOD
LOD
LOD
THE SIZE AND DEPTH OF THE GREEN ROOF AREAS WILL BE

DETERMINED WITH FINAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS,
HOWEVER THE FINAL DESIGN WILL MEET THE REQUIRED
STORMWATER RETENTION VOLUME (3,465 CF).
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
I STREET, S.W.
0
15
'R
20
40
1"= 40'
THE
BARD
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
S o u t h w e s t
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT/GAR PLAN
C5
S TO R M WAT E R M A N AG E M E N T/G A R PL A N
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6.4
SWM NARRATIVE
FOR EACH GREEN ROOF AREA:
I.
Sv = SWRv MAX = [1.7 X [(0.95 X 1.0) + (0.25 X 0.0) X SA]

12
SITE DESCRIPTION:
THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF 6TH STREET AND I STREET SOUTHWEST
AND HAS A TOTAL AREA OF 36,476 SF. THIS PROJECT WILL DISTURB APPROXIMATELY 47,000
SQUARE FEET (1.07 AC).
SV = SA x[(d x n1) + (DL x n2)]

12
II.
GREEN ROOF SWRv = 1,487 CF

GREEN ROOF STORAGE = 3,483 CF *
STORMWATER RETENTION VOLUME REQUIREMENTS:
THE PRIVATE STORMWATER RETENTION VOLUME (SWRv) CALCULATIONS ARE SHOWN

BELOW:
[P x [(RvI x %I) + (RvC x %C) + (RvN x %N) x SA]
12
SWRv = [1.2 x [(0.95 x 0.97) + (0.25 x 0.03) x 36,476]
12
SWRv REQUIRED = 3,465 CF
STORAGE REQUIRED = 6,428 CF
SWRv:
SEE GREEN ROOF TABLE ON THIS SHEET FOR CALCULATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL GREEN ROOF
AREAS.
A CISTERN IS PROPOSED TO COLLECT RUNOFF TO BE REUSED ON SITE FOR COOLING
TOWER PURPOSES. PER DOEE SIZING PROCEDURE, AN APPROXIMATE 45,000 GALLON
CISTERN WILL COLLECT RUNOFF FROM AN APPROXIMATE 15,000 SF DRAINAGE AREA (NOTE
THAT THE CISTERN SIZE AND DRAINAGE AREA ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. DETAILED CISTERN
INPUT AND OUTPUT RESULTS, AS WELL AS FINAL SIZING, WILL BE PROVIDED ONCE FINAL
COOLING TOWER MAKEUP HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR THE SITE).
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CALCULATED ONCE STREETSCAPE DESIGN

IS FINALIZED. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL BE TREATED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT
PRACTICABLE.
CISTERN SWRv = 2,019 CF *

CISTERN STORAGE = 2,985 CF *
III.
TOTAL SITE SWRv PROVIDED: 3,506 CF

TOTAL SITE STORAGE PROVIDED: 6,468 CF *
STORMWATER RETENTION VOLUME PROVIDED:
PRIVATE/ON-SITE STORMWATER RETENTION WILL BE PROVIDED THROUGH THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIPLE GREEN ROOFS AND A CISTERN. THE FOLLOWING
CALCULATIONS WERE USED TO DETERMINE THE PROVIDED STORAGE AND MAXIMUM SWRv
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
C6
ON-SITE STORM SEWER NETWORK:
THE PROPOSED STORM SEWER SYSTEM CONVEYS AND FILTERS ONSITE STORMWATER
THROUGH THE GREEN ROOF. STORMWATER FLOWS ABOVE THE 1.2 STORM EVENT WILL
DISCHARGE TO A STORM LATERAL THAT CONNECTS TO THE PUBLIC STORM SEWER LINE
WITHIN I STREET SW. CISTERN OVERFLOW DRAINS WILL CONNECT TO THE INTERIOR
PLUMBING SYSTEM AND BE PUMPED OUT TO THE SAME CONNECTION POINT AS THE GREEN
ROOF OVERFLOW.
VII.
SUMMARY:
ON-SITE RUNOFF NOT ABLE TO BE STORED ON-SITE WILL BE CONVEYED TO A PROPOSED

STORM SEWER LATERAL WHICH CONNECTS INTO THE EXISTING PUBLIC STORM SEWER
WITHIN THE I STREET SW RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE TOTAL PROPOSED STORMWATER, STRATEGY
OUTLINED IN THIS NARRATIVE PROVIDES A TOTAL SWRv OF 3,506 CF. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
SWRv REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DETERMINED ONCE STREETSCAPE DESIGN IS FINALIZED. THIS
REQUIREMENT WILL BE TREATED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE.
* NOTE: STORAGE VALUES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FINAL GREEN ROOF
SPECIFICATIONS AND FINAL CISTERN DEMAND INPUT.
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
VI.
S TO R M WAT E R M A N AG E M E N T N A R R AT I V E
D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6.5
DUE EAST 280.00'

END SAFETY FENCE
SF
SF LOD
SF
LOD
LOD
SF
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
LOD
SF
LOD
LOD
SF
SF
LOD
LOD
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
SF
SCE
SF
LOD
LOD
SF
DUE SOUTH 44.00'
SF
LOD
CIP
SF
DUE WEST 145.00'

AGIP
SF
LOD
DUE SOUTH 178.93'
SF
LOD
SP
SAF
SAF
SF
LOD
SCE
SCE
LOD = 1.07 AC
(46,934 SF)
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
SAF
SP
LOD
6TH STREET, S.W.
SF LOD
AGIP
AGIP
SAF
N0000'00"E 222.93'
SF LOD
SF
LOD
LOD
LOD
TIE SILT FENCE SECURELY

INTO MOUNTABLE BERM
SF
SP
PST
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
NOTE: SPOIL MATERIAL SHALL BE DISCARDED AT A SITE WITH AN

ACTIVE GRADING PERMIT AND APPROVED SEDIMENT
CONTROL PLAN. BORROW MATERIAL SHALL BE OBTAINED
FROM AN APPROVED SITE WITH AN ACTIVE GRADING
PERMIT AND AN APPROVED SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN.
SF
CIP
LOD
PST
BEGIN SAFETY FENCE
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
SF
LOD
LOD
SF
SFD
LO
SF
SF
LOD
SAF
SAF
I STREET, S.W.
LOD
CIP
PROVIDE INLET PROTECTION

AT NEXT DOWNSTREAM
INLET
BARD
CUT VOLUME = TBD

FINAL VOLUME = TBD
20
40
1"= 40'
civil
REDEVELOPMENT
S o u t h w e s t
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN
C6
LOT AREA = 36,476 SF

DISTURBED AREA = 46,934 SF
DUE WEST 135.00'
THE
SITE TABULATION
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
TM
BOLHER DC
engineers
PUD SUBMISSION
6.6
ELEC VAULT
1
SLOPE 4.5% (5.16')
ELEC VAULT
SLOPE 4.5% (5.16')
18.83'
18.83'
12'x30'
12'x30'
LOADING
DN
LOADING
DN
10'x24'
10'x24'
RAMP DN 7.5%
COSTUME/CRAFT
DN
RAMP DN 7.5%
COSTUME/CRAFT
DN
RAMP DN 15%
+/-23.50'
RAMP DN 15%
+/-23.50'
M.P.
23.00'
M.P.
23.00'
COURTYARD
COURTYARD
NON-PROFIT OFFICE
NON-PROFIT OFFICE
FITNESS
CENTER
FITNESS
CENTER
LEASING
GARAGE
EXHAUST
LEASING
TOILET
OA
OA
PACKAGE
MAIL
BUSINESS
CENTER
GARAGE
EXHAUST
TOILET
PACKAGE
22.45'
STC
HOUSING
22.45'
MAIL
BUSINESS
CENTER
+/-22.25'
+/-22.25'
+/-23.50'
+/-23.50'
LOBBY
LOBBY
21.75'
21.75'
22.70'
22.70'
PROPERTY
LINE
22.54'
22.03'
PROPERTY
LINE
21.95'
22.54'
22.03'
21.95'
501 Eye Street: 24' Truck Turning Maneuvers

Design Vehicle: 24' Truck
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT

D . C .
501 Eye Street SW

February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
1" = 40'
GOROVE / SLADE
PUD SUBMISSION
transportation
engineers
6.7
ELEC VAULT
1
SLOPE 4.5% (5.16')
ELEC VAULT
SLOPE 4.5% (5.16')
18.83'
12'x30'
12'x30'
LOADING
DN
10'x24'
10'x24'
RAMP DN 7.5%
COSTUME/CRAFT
DN
RAMP DN 7.5%
COSTUME/CRAFT
DN
RAMP DN 15%
+/-23.50'
RAMP DN 15%
+/-23.50'
M.P.
23.00'
M.P.
23.00'
COURTYARD
COURTYARD
NON-PROFIT OFFICE
NON-PROFIT OFFICE
FITNESS
CENTER
FITNESS
CENTER
LEASING
LEASING
GARAGE
EXHAUST
TOILET
GARAGE
EXHAUST
TOILET
OA
OA
PACKAGE
22.45'
STC
HOUSING
18.83'
LOADING
DN
STC
HOUSING
PACKAGE
MAIL
BUSINESS
CENTER
22.45'
MAIL
BUSINESS
CENTER
+/-22.25'
+/-22.25'
+/-23.50'
+/-23.50'
LOBBY
LOBBY
21.75'
21.75'
22.70'
22.70'
PROPERTY
LINE
22.54'
22.03'
PROPERTY
LINE
21.95'
22.54'
22.03'
21.95'
501 Eye Street: SU-30 Turning Maneuvers

Design Vehicle: 30' Truck
THE
BARD
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
501 Eye Street SW

D . C .
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
1" = 40'
GOROVE / SLADE
PUD SUBMISSION
transportation
engineers
6.8
LEED
TM
2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations
January 15, 2016
The Bard 501
TARGET
LEED
SILVER
50
11
48
Total Project Score
Possible Points
Certified: 40 to 49 points
21
Y
1
5
SSp1
SSc1
SSc2
SSc3
SSc4.1
SSc4.2
SSc4.3
SSc4.4
SSc5.1
SSc5.2
SSc6.1
SSc6.2
SSc7.1
SSc7.2
SSc8
Water Efficiency
1
6
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Y
2
Sustainable Sites
WEp1
WEc1
WEc2
WEc3
Construction Activity Pollution Prevention

Req'd
Site Selection
1
Development Density and Community Connectivity
5
Brownfield Redevelopment
1
Alternative Transportation: Public Transportation Access
6
Alternative Transportation: Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms
1
Alternative Transportation: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 3
Alternative Transportation: Parking Capacity
2
Site Development: Protect or Restore Habitat
1
Site Development: Maximize Open Space
1
Stormwater Design: Quantity Control
1
Stormwater Design: Quality Control
1
Heat Island Effect: Nonroof
1
Heat Island Effect: Roof
1
Light Pollution Reduction
1
23 Energy and Atmosphere
12
7
2
2
Req'd
4
2
4
EAp1
EAp2
EAp3
EAc1
EAc2
EAc3
EAc4
EAc5
EAc6
Req'd
Req'd
Req'd
19
7
2
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Yes - Credit points to be achieved
Maybe - Credit points possibly pursued
No - Credit points not pursued
S o u t h w e s t
REDEVELOPMENT
IDc1.1
IDc1.2
IDc1.3
IDc1.4
IDc1.5
IDc2
3
M
February 3, 2016
sba project# 14105
Possible Points
Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control
Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring
Increased Ventilation
Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction
Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy
Low-Emitting Materials: Adhesives and Sealants
Low-Emitting Materials: Paints and Coatings
Low-Emitting Materials: Flooring Systems
Low-Emitting Materials: Composite Wood and Laminate Adhesives
Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control
Controllability of Systems: Lighting
Controllability of Systems: Thermal Comfort
Thermal Comfort: Design
Thermal Comfort: Verification
Daylight and Views: Daylight
Daylight and Views: Views
Possible Points
Innovation in Design: Green Cleaning Program

Innovation in Design: Education and Awareness
Innovation in Design: Walkable Project Site
Innovation in Design: Exeplary Perfromance - SSc2
Innovation in Design: Exeplary Perfromance - SSc4.1
LEED Accredited Professional
14
Req'd
3
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
15
Req'd
Req'd
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Regional Priority
Possible Points
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RPc1.1
Regional Priority: EAc1
RPc1.2
Regional Priority: SSc5.1
RPc1.3
RPc1.4
RPc1.5
RPc1.6
Regional Priority: SSc6.1

Regional Priority: WEc2
Regional Priority: EAc2
Regional Priority: MRc1.1
1
1
1
1
LEED SCORECARD
D . C .
Possible Points
1
1
1
Prepared by Paladino and Company Inc., Copyright 2016
BARD
1
1
1
1
1
1
EQp1
EQp2
EQc1
EQc2
EQc3.1
EQc3.2
EQc4.1
EQc4.2
EQc4.3
EQc4.4
EQc5
EQc6.1
EQc6.2
EQc7.1
EQc7.2
EQc8.1
EQc8.2
110
Platinum: 80 to 110 points
Storage and Collection of Recyclables

Building Reuse: Maintain Existing Walls, Floors, and Roof
Building Reuse: Maintain Interior Nonstructural Elements
Construction Waste Management
Materials Reuse
Recycled Content
Regional Materials
Rapidly Renewable Materials
Certified Wood
Innovation and Design Process
THE
Possible Points 35
Fundamental Commissioning
Minimum Energy Performance
Fundamental Refrigerant Management
Optimize Energy Performance
On-Site Renewable Energy
Enhanced Commissioning
Enhanced Refrigerant Management
Measurement and Verification
Green Power
Indoor Environmental Quality
1
1
Y
Y
1
Materials and Resources
1
1
2
1
2
Gold: 60 to 79 points
MRp1
MRc1.1
MRc1.2
MRc2
MRc3
MRc4
MRc5
MRc6
MRc7
3
1
2
1
Possible Points 10
Water Use Reduction

Water-Efficient Landscaping
Innovative Wastewater Technologies
Water Use Reduction
2
2
1
Y
Y
Y
3
Possible Points 26
Silver: 50 to 59 points
architects
PUD SUBMISSION
7.1
Exhibit B
TABLE OF ZONING DATA
DCMR, Title 11
Zoning
Development Standards
R-3 (Existing)
SP-2
SP-2 PUD (DCMR

Ch. 24)
Proposed Development
FAR
402, 531
None prescribed
6.0 (non-residential max

of 3.5)
6.5 (non-residential
max of 4.5)
Total: 4.09
Residential: 3.60
Non-Profit Office: 0.49
Gross Floor Area1
None prescribed
218,856 sq. ft. (nonresidential max of

127,666)
237,094 sq. ft. (nonresidential max of

164,142)
Total: 149,298 sq. ft.

Residential: 131,273 sq. ft.
Non-Profit Office: 18,025
sq. ft.
Lot Occupancy
403, 532
Row Dwelling, Church, or

Public School: 60%
All Other Structures: 40%
Residential: 80%
Same as matter-ofright
Residential: 77%2
Building Height
400, 530
40 ft.
3 stories
90 ft.
73 ft., 2 in. (7th floor roof)

62 ft., 4 in. (6th floor roof)
41 ft. 11 in. (4th floor roof)
Penthouse Area
411, 537
0.37 FAR
0.37 FAR
0.13 FAR (4,870 sq. ft.)
Penthouse Height
530
20 ft.
20 ft.
18 ft., 6 in.
Penthouse Setback
530
1:1 ratio
1:1 ratio
Varies; relief requested
Rear Yard
404, 534
20 ft.
2 in. per ft. of height,

12 ft. minimum
(15 ft., 5 in. required at
73 ft., 2 in.)
A compliant closed court

(Closed Court #1) provided
in lieu of rear yard
Gross Floor Area (GFA) includes a deduction of 2% for mechanical shafts, but does not include areas for (1) bays projecting over the property line, (2) parking
access ramps, and (3) spaces with structural clearance less than 6 ft., 6 in.
2
Garage ramp not included in building area, as it is below its main floor. See 11 DCMR 534.4
Side Yard
405, 535
Courts
Open Court
406, 536
Closed Court
406, 536
None required (except as

noted in 405.1, 405.2,
and 405.6)
None required
If provided, 2 in. of
height, 8 ft. minimum
(11 ft., 10 in. required at
70 ft., 2 in. of height for
Main Tower)
(8 ft. required at 47 ft., 3
in. of height for Fellow
Housing
20 ft., 11 in. for Main

Towner
8 ft., 1 in. for Annex
Housing
Width: 4 in. per ft. of

height
One-family dwelling: 6 ft.
min.
All other structures: 10 ft.
min.
Non-residential uses:
height, 12 ft. min.
Residential uses:
height 15 ft. min.
Open court #1: width
required: 24 ft., 8 in. at
73 ft. 11 in. of height
Not provided

height
One-family dwelling: 5 ft.
min.
All other structures: 15 ft.
min.
Area: 2x the square of the
required court width; 350
sq. ft. min.
Non-residential uses:
Area: 2x the square of
the required width; 250
sq. ft.
Residential uses:
Area: 2x the square of
the required width: 350
sq. ft.
Closed court #1: width
required: 30 ft., 8 in. at
91 ft. 8 in. of height
2
Open court #1: width: 10

ft. (relief requested)
Closed court #1 (in lieu of

rear yard):
Parking
2101, 506
Residential
1 per dwelling unit
Parking (contd)
Loading
2201
None required
Area required: 1,881 sq.

ft.
Width: 48 ft.
Area: 2,571 sq. ft.
Closed court #2: width

required: 21 ft. at 62 ft.,
4 in. of height
Area required: 882 sq.
ft.
Closed Court #2
Width: 15 ft. (relief
requested)
Area: 1,918 sq. ft.
Residential
1 per dwelling unit
34 required3
Residential
367
Non-Profit Office
16 required4
Non-Profit Office
168
Art Use
9 required5
Art Use
9 (see fn. 8)
Education Use
9 required6
Education Use
9 (see fn. 8)
Residential
1 berth at 55 ft. deep
1 platform at 200 sq. ft.
Residential
1 berth at 30 ft. deep
1 platform at 100 sq. ft.
The proposed number of dwelling units is 136. The final dwelling unit count may vary by 10% per flexibility requested. Proposed residential parking range:
3237.
4
Non-profit office parking in excess of 2,00 sq. ft., 1 for each space for each additional 1,800 sq. ft., 16 spaces required for 31,690 sq. ft. of office.
5
One 1 space for every 600 sq. ft. Nine spaces required for 5,200 sq. ft. of art studio space.
6
Educational program parking: 2 spaces for 3 teachers. Three spaces required for 7 teachers.
7
The proposed number of residential parking spaces is based on a unit total of 136. The final residential parking count may vary by 10% per flexibility
requested. Proposed residential parking range: 3237.
8
Of the 34 spaces provided for non-profit office, art, and education uses, 11 are tandem spaces.
1 service/delivery at 20
ft. deep
Green Area Ratio

3400
None required
1 service/delivery at 20 ft.
deep
(relief requested)
Education Use
None required9
Education Use
None provided
Non-Profit Office
None required (See
fn. 9)
Non-Profit Office
None required
0.3
0.333 provided
See Page 3.14 of the plans
Inclusionary Zoning
2600
Bike Parking
802
None required
Residential:
1 per dwelling unit
45 long-term
For non-profit office and educational uses with less than 30,000 gross sq. ft., no loading facilities are required. See 11 DCMR 2201.
Residential:
45 long-term
LOT 61
LOT 89
LOT 88
LOT 90
LOT 85
LOT 84
LOT 82
A&T LOT 886
LOT 83
SOUTH 44.00' (REC)

43.96' (SUR)
EAST 280.00' (REC) 280.13' (SUR)
SOUTH 178.93' (REC & SUR)
NORTH 222.93' (REC) 222.89' (SUR)
WEST 145.00' (REC & SUR)
WEST 135.00' (REC) 135.13' (SUR)
LOT 52 SQUARE 498

LOT FIFTY-TWO (52) IN SQUARE FOUR HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT (498) IN THE SUBDIVISION
MADE BY DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REDEVELOPMENT LAND AGENCY, AS PER PLAT RECORDED
IN LIBER NO. 141 AT FOLIO 118 AMONG THE RECORDS OF THE OFFICE OF THE SURVEYOR FOR
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
1.
AREA LOT 52:
36,476 SQ. FT. (RECORD)

36,493 SQ. FT. (SURVEYED)
2.
HORIZONTAL DATUM: D.C. SURVEYOR'S OFFICE MERIDIAN (DCSO)
3.
PROPERTY SHOWN AMONG THE RECORDS OF THE D.C. SURVEYOR'S OFFICE IN

SUBDIVISION BOOK 141 - PAGE 118
4.
PROPERTY ZONED: R-3
5.
THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON DOES NOT LIE WITHIN ANY SPECIAL FLOOD PLAIN
HAZARD AREA AS ESTABLISHED BY THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, NATIONAL FLOOD
INSURANCE PROGRAM, FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS, COMMUNITY PANEL NO.
110001 0019C, MAP REVISED SEPTEMBER 27, 2010.
6.
PROPERTY CORNER MARKERS NOT INSTALLED BY THIS SURVEY.
7.
BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON WAS OBTAINED FROM OFFICIAL CITY

RECORDS AND VERIFIED IN THE FIELD INSOFAR AS POSSIBLE. PROPERTY LINE
DIMENSIONS FROM OFFICIAL RECORDS MAY NOT NECESSARILY AGREE WITH
ACTUAL MEASURED DIMENSIONS. ALL PROPERTY LINES IN THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY THE OFFICE OF THE SURVEYOR, D.C.
8.
THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON ARE FROM VISIBLE FIELD
EVIDENCE AND CANNOT BE GUARANTEED. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION WAS NOT
PERFORMED. FOR MARKING OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES, CALL MISS UTILITY
AT 1-800-257-7777 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR
CONSTRUCTION.
9.
SURVEY WAS PERFORMED AT TIME OF HEAVY SNOWFALL AND IS SUBJECT TO

FURTHER SITE VISITATION TO CONFIRM SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
A&T LOT 886
1140 Connecticut Avenue NW

Suite 600
202.296.8625
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Meridith Moldenhauer
GMMW
Bill Denton
Erkiletian
Patrick Burkhart
Shalom Baranes Associates
Tim Fowler
Shakespeare Theatre Company
Maris E. Fry, EIT

Robert B. Schiesel, P.E.
Daniel B. VanPelt, P.E., PTOE
Date:
Subject:
February 1, 2016
501 Eye Street Preliminary Transportation Review
INTRODUCTION
This memorandum presents a Preliminary Transportation Review of the transportation aspects of the 501 Eye Street
development. A Comprehensive Transportation Review (CTR) is being performed and is currently being scoped with the
District Department of Transportation (DDOT), and a full CTR report will be issued prior to the Zoning Commission hearing.
The development is located in the Southwest quadrant of Washington, DC as shown in Figure 1. The site is currently vacant,
but formerly served as the home of Southeastern University, consisting of a two-story building, a small 32-space surface
parking lot, and 6 parking spaces under the building. The redevelopment plan proposes a mixed-use building that includes
facilities to serve the Shakespeare Theatre Company (STC) and residential uses. The STC facilities will primarily include
nonprofit administrative office space, educational space, rehearsal space, and production space. The residential component
will include 136 units, 93 of which will be general market rate apartments, 9 of which will be inclusionary zoning apartments,
and 34 of which will act as actor and fellow housing for STC. Access will be from an existing curb cut on 6 th Street and will
serve both parking and loading activity.
The purpose of this Preliminary Transportation Review is to:
Provide a summary of major transportation features near and adjacent to the site including reviewing roadways,
transit facilities, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities;
Evaluate the overall transportation demand of the site in comparison to its previous uses; and
Review the transportation elements of the development site plan and demonstrate that the site promotes nonautomobile modes of travel and sustainability.
This Review concludes that:
The site is well-served by existing public transit service and has access to well-connected pedestrian and bicycle
facilities;
Transportation Planners and Engineers
www.goroveslade.com
Page 2
February 1, 2016
The site is expected to generate a manageable amount of auto and non-auto trips, with a much lower vehicular trip
generation than that of former uses on the site;
The site design takes advantage of the existing curb cut for both parking and loading access;
The proposed parking supply meets zoning requirements and although the Applicant is requesting loading relief, the
proposed loading plan is expected to accommodate all loading demand; and
A pick-up/drop-off area is proposed along 6th Street that will serve STC during the day and residents in the evening
and overnight.
SITE LOCATION & MAJOR TRANSPORTATION FEATURES

The proposed development is located at 501 Eye Street in the Southwest quadrant of Washington, DC. The site is served by
many regional roadways and arterials including Interstate 395, Interstate 695, Maine Ave SW, M Street SW/SE, and South
Capitol Street. The site is accessible via these roadways, along with a network of collector and local streets.
The site is well-served by public transportation, including Metrorail and Metrobus service. The project site is also served by a
pedestrian network consisting of sidewalks and crosswalks along the local streets and surrounding the project site. In addition
to pedestrian accommodations, the site is served by a bicycle network, which consists of mixed-use trails and bike lanes.
Car Sharing
Three car-sharing companies serve the District: Zipcar, Enterprise Carshare, and Daimlers Car2Go. All three services are
private companies that provide registered users access to a variety of automobiles. Both Zipcar and Enterprise Carshare have
locations adjacent to the project site. Table 1 lists the car-sharing locations within a quarter-mile of the site and the number
of vehicles available at each location.
Table 1: Car Share Locations and Vehicles
Carshare Location
Number of Vehicles
Zipcar
Waterside Towers (907 6th Street SW)
1 Vehicle
502 I Street SW (on-street)
2 Vehicles
rd
3 /K Street SW
3 Vehicles
Enterprise Carshare
Waterfront Metro Station (1100 4th Street SW)
5 Vehicles
Total Number of Car Share Vehicles near Site
11 Vehicles
Car-sharing is also provided by Car2Go, which provides point-to-point car sharing. Unlike Zipcar, which requires two-way
trips, Car2Go can be used for one-way rentals. Car2Go currently has a small fleet of vehicles located throughout the District.
Car2Go vehicles may park in any non-restricted Metered curbside parking space or Residential Parking Permit location in any
zone throughout the defined Home Area. Members do not have to pay the meter or pay stations. Car2Go does not have
permanent designated spaces for their vehicles; however availability is tracked through their website, which provides an
additional option for car-sharing patrons.
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 3
February 1, 2016
Figure 1: Site Location
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 4
February 1, 2016
Transit
The development site is well served by heavy rail, commuter bus, and local bus service. Combined, these transit services
provide local, city wide, and regional transit connections and link the site with major cultural, residential, employment, and
commercial destinations throughout the region. Figure 2 identifies the major transit routes, stations, and stops in the area.
Metrorail and Metrobus services connect the site with other District neighborhoods and the Washington Metropolitan region.
The site is primarily serviced by Metrobus along the M Street, Eye Street, 4th Street, and 7th Street corridors. The routes serving
this area connect the site to various locations throughout the District and the downtown business core. Table 2 shows a
summary of the bus route information for the Lines that serve the site vicinity, including service hours, headway, and walking
distance to the nearest bus stop.
The Waterfront Metrorail station is located approximately 0.3 miles of the site and the LEnfant Plaza Metrorail station and
LEnfant VRE station are just under half a mile from the site. Waterfront station serves the Green Line while LEnfant Plaza
station serves the Green, Yellow, Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines. The Green Line connects the development with major
downtown connections such as Chinatown/Gallery Place, as well as Fort Totten and Greenbelt, Maryland to the north and
Branch Avenue station in Maryland to the South. The Yellow, Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines provide service to additional
major destinations within the District, Maryland, and Virginia, including Arlington, Alexandria, and Tysons. Metrorail trains
run approximately every three minutes during the morning and afternoon peak hours. They run about every 5-6 minutes
during weekday non-peak hours, every 10-15 minutes on weekday evenings after 7:00 pm and 6-15 minutes on the weekends
Table 2: Bus Route Information
Route
Route Name
Number
Service Hours1
Headway1
Walking Distance to
Nearest Bus Stop
74
Convention Center-Southwest
Waterfront Line
Weekdays: 5:03AM 12:03AM
15 min 20 min
0.1 miles, 1 minutes
735
Charlotte Hall/Waldorf to
Washington DC
Weekdays: Northbound 4:20AM 7:00AM

Southbound 12:15PM 5:25PM
20 30 min
A9
Martin Luther King Jr. Ave.

Limited Line
Weekdays: Northbound 5:55AM 8:50AM

Southbound 3:35PM 6:52PM
15 min
A42,46,48
Anacostia-Congress Heights Line
Weekdays: 4:00AM 12:00 AM

Weekends: 4:04AM 12:40 AM
15 30 min
D300
Dale City-Washington Navy Yard
Weekdays: Inbound: 4:36AM 6:43 AM

Outbound: 12:13PM 7:42PM
30 90 min
P6
Anacostia-Eckington Line

Weekends: 8:27AM 11:56 PM
15 30 min
V7, V8, V9
Minnesota Avenue-M Street Line
30 min
W9
South Capitol Street Limited Line
Weekdays: Southbound: 6:15 AM 9:07 AM

Northbound: 3:15 PM 6:15 PM
15 30 min
WMATA route schedules, http://wmata.com/bus/timetables/
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 5
February 1, 2016
Bicycle Facilities
Near the development site bicycles have access to multi-use trails, on-street bike lanes, signed bike routes, and local and
residential streets that facilitate cycling. The bicycle network provides good conditions for local trips and there are several
routes for trips between the site and other areas within the District.
The site is located directly along the Eye Street SE/SW bike lanes and less than a block from the 4 th Street SW bike lanes.
These bicycle lanes provide connectivity to areas around the site and link cyclists to other bicycle facilities in the District.
Additionally, the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail is conveniently located near the site and accessible from on-street bicycle facilities.
Although the trail has some breaks from end to end, signed bike routes lead users along safe routes back to the trail. A map
of the existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the site is shown in Figure 3.
Although there is bicycle parking near the Waterfront Metrorail Station and other new developments nearby, there is little
to no dedicated short-term bicycle parking directly surrounding the site. This results in many cyclists using street signs, parking
meter, or similar objects to secure their bicycles. This indicates that there is a demand for additional bicycle parking facilities
in the area.
In addition, the Capital Bikeshare program allows for an additional cycling option. Users can choose to join the program for
one day, three days, a month, or a year. Therefore this program is perfect for both visitors and residents of the area. Users
can rent a bike from the nearest docking station, ride the bike to their destination, and return the bike to a different docking
station, making the system convenient for one-way and two-way trips. The Capital Bikeshare program has placed over 350
bicycle-share stations across Washington, DC, Arlington and Alexandria, VA, and Montgomery County, MD with over 3,000
bicycles provided. There are two stations within a quarter-mile radius of the site located at 6th and Water Street SW / SW
Waterfront and at 4th and M Street SW contributing to a total of 42 docking stations as summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Bikeshare Locations and Docking Stations
Bikeshare Location
6th and Water Street SW / SW Waterfront
4th and M Street SW
Total Number of Bikeshare Docking Stations
Gorove/Slade
Number of Docking Stations

19 docking stations
23 docking stations
42 docking stations
www.goroveslade.com
Page 6
February 1, 2016
Figure 2: Existing Transit Facilities
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 7
February 1, 2016
Figure 3: Existing Bicycle Facilities
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com

January 1, 2016
Page 8
Pedestrian Facilities
This section provides an inventory of the existing pedestrian facilities and deficiencies. Overall, the pedestrian facilities near
the development site provide a good walking environment. Pedestrian access to the site is provided along all adjacent streets.
The site has good pedestrian access to nearby transit. The Waterfront-SEU Metrorail station is located approximately 0.3
miles from the site, with a portal located on 4th Street SW just north of M Street SW. Additionally, the LEnfant Plaza Metrorail
station is located just under a half-mile from the site and provides access to the Yellow, Blue, Silver, and Orange lines as well.
The site is also within walking distance to many bus routes along M Street, I Street, 4 th Street, and 7th Street that provide local
and commuter service between the area and additional destinations within the District.
There are a few barriers or areas of concern near the site that negatively impact the quality and attractiveness of walking,
including walking distances between the site and some major destinations, manmade and natural barriers that increase
walking distances, and roadway conditions that reduce the quality of walking conditions, including narrow sidewalks, lengthy
freeway overpasses, and lengthy crossings at some intersections. These are primarily due to the sites proximity to Interstate
395. Figure 4 illustrates major walking routes and pedestrian barriers in the vicinity of the site.
A detailed review of pedestrian facilities near the site shows that most facilities meet DDOT standards, and provide a quality
walking environment. Figure 5 shows a detailed illustration of the existing pedestrian infrastructure within a quarter-mile
walkshed of the development site. Sidewalks, crosswalks, and curb ramps are evaluated based on the guidelines set forth by
DDOTs Public Realm Design Manual in addition to ADA standards. Sidewalk width and buffer requirements for the District
are shown below in Table 4. Within the quarter-mile walkshed, most roads are considered residential with a moderate to
high density due to the proximity to the Waterfront-SEU and LEnfant Plaza Metrorail stations, the presence of multiple
elementary and middle schools, and the frequency of commercial buildings that serve the neighborhood. The majority of
sidewalks comply with an 8 foot sidewalk width and most have a 4 to 6 foot buffer. Even if no buffer exists between the edge
of the sidewalk and the roadway, most roadways allow on-street parking which creates an additional buffer between
pedestrians and vehicular traffic. ADA standards require that all curb ramps be provided wherever an accessible route crosses
a curb and must have a detectable warning. Additionally, shared curb ramps between two crosswalks is not desired. As
shown in the figure, under existing conditions there are occasional issues regarding curb ramps and for the most part, these
issues are due to a lack of detectable warning strips.
Table 4: Sidewalk Requirements
Street Type
Minimum Sidewalk Width
Minimum Buffer Width
Residential (Low to Moderate Density)
6 ft
4 ft (6 ft preferred for tree space)
Residential (High Density)
8 ft
4 ft (6 ft preferred for tree space)
Commercial (Non-downtown)
10 ft
4 ft
Downtown
16 ft
6 ft
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 9
February 1, 2016
Figure 4: Pedestrian Pathways
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 10
February 1, 2016
Figure 5: Pedestrian Infrastructure
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 11
February 1, 2016
SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION DEMAND

This section provides a summary of the transportation demand for the 501 Eye Street development. It summarizes the
proposed trip generation of the site by land use and by mode, including vehicular, transit, bicycle, and walking.
Mode Split & Trip Generation Assumptions

Weekday peak hour trip generation for the market rate residential component of the 501 Eye Street development was
calculated based on the methodology outlined in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition.
This methodology was supplemented to account for the urban nature of the site (Trip Generation provides data for nonurban, low transit use sites) and to generate trips for multiple modes. Residential trip generation was calculated based on ITE
land use 220, Apartment, splitting trips into different modes using assumptions derived from census data for the residents
that currently live near the site.
Transportation demand for the Shakespeare Theatre Company (STC) was determined based on survey information provided
by STC in March of 2015. Demand was broken up into several user groups to accommodate for varying arrival/departure
times and expected mode splits. Based on this information, the highest vehicle-trip generation numbers occur in August,
when STC population is at its highest. Of note, apartments allocated to STC actors are not expected to generate any vehicular
trips as actors are not likely to have a car on-site unless there are available parking spaces in the garage.
A summary of mode splits for both STC and market rate residential uses are shown in Table 5. A summary of the trip
generation for the development is shown in Table 6.
Table 5: Mode Split Summary
Mode Split
User Group
Auto
Transit
Walk
Bike
Housed On-Site
Shakespeare Theatre Company (per STC Survey)

Full-Time Staff
30%
45%
4%
4%
17%
Part-time staff
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
Call Center
40%
50%
10%
0%
0%
Volunteers
60%
40%
0%
0%
0%
Summer Camp
67%
25%
8%
0%
0%
MAC
70%
20%
10%
0%
0%
Shakespeare Salon
20%
80%
0%
0%
0%
Home School
80%
20%
0%
0%
0%
After School Class
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
Workshops & Training
25%
50%
10%
15%
0%
STC Actors
10%
20%
0%
20%
50%
ACA Rehearsals
10%
80%
5%
5%
0%
Ford Theater Rehearsals
20%
60%
8%
12%
0%
10%
0%
Non-STC Component (per census data)

Apartments
Gorove/Slade
55%
33%
2%
www.goroveslade.com
Page 12
February 1, 2016
Table 6: Multi-Modal Trip Generation Summary

Mode
Auto
Transit
Bike
Walk
Land Use
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Residential
6 veh/hr
23 veh/hr
29 veh/hr
26 veh/hr
14 veh/hr
40 veh/hr
STC
34 veh/hr
6 veh/hr
40 veh/hr
28 veh/hr
11 veh/hr
39 veh/hr
Total
40 veh/hr
29 veh/hr
69 veh/hr
54 veh/hr
25 veh/hr
79 veh/hr
Residential
4 ppl/hr
16 ppl/hr
20 ppl/hr
17 ppl/hr
10 ppl/hr
27 ppl/hr
STC
47 ppl/hr
2 ppl/hr
49 ppl/hr
8 ppl/hr
15 ppl/hr
23 ppl/hr
Total
51 ppl/hr
18 ppl/hr
69 ppl/hr
25 ppl/hr
25 ppl/hr
50 ppl/hr
Residential
0 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
2 ppl/hr
STC
3 ppl/hr
0 ppl/hr
3 ppl/hr
0 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
Total
3 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
4 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
2 ppl/hr
3 ppl/hr
Residential
1 ppl/hr
5 ppl/hr
6 ppl/hr
5 ppl/hr
3 ppl/hr
8 ppl/hr
STC
3 ppl/hr
0 ppl/hr
3 ppl/hr
4 ppl/hr
1 ppl/hr
5 ppl/hr
Total
4 ppl/hr
5 ppl/hr
9 ppl/hr
9 ppl/hr
4 ppl/hr
13 ppl/hr
Southeastern University Comparison

The 501 Eye Street site has historically been home to institutional uses. Although the site is currently a vacant lot, the site
served Southeastern University (SEU) until 2009 and contained a two-story building with approximately 38 parking spaces.
During its final semester SEU had an enrollment of 870 students (including 648 undergraduate students and 222 graduate
students) with approximately 140 faculty and staff members and primarily served District residents.
As stated above, trip generation is calculated based on the methodology outlined in ITEs Trip Generation Manual. Trip
generation for the university was calculated based on ITE land use 550, University/College. Typically, Trip Generation results
are supplemented to account for the urban nature of the site; however, universities and colleges typically operate more like
an urban environment because so many students live on-campus and some universities provide private transit services. For
this reason, and because SEU did not house students on campus and primarily functioned as a commuter school, mode split
percentages were not applied to the base trip generation values. It is assumed that these values are already a more accurate
representation of vehicular trip generation given the typical nature of colleges and universities.
Based on these assumptions, a vehicular trip generation summary for the former SEU is shown in Table 7.
Table 7: SEU Vehicular Trip Generation
Land Use
SEU
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
115 veh/hr
33 veh/hr
148 veh/hr
47 veh/hr
101 veh/hr
148 veh/hr
As shown, the estimated trip generation for the former SEU is much greater than that proposed for 501 Eye Street
development. Additionally, and discussed in more detail in the following section, the proposed development will be including
a parking supply that more adequately serves all uses of the site. Due to the large trip generation of SEU and the limited
parking supply, it is assumed that many students were forced to park in the neighborhood.
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 13
February 1, 2016
DESIGN REVIEW
This section provides an overview of the on-site transportation features of the proposed 501 Eye Street development. 501
Eye Street is located on the northeast corner of Eye Street and 6 th Street in the Southwest quadrant of the District. The site
is currently vacant, but formerly served as the home of Southeastern University, consisting of a two-story building, a 32-space
surface parking lot, and 6 parking spaces under the building. The redevelopment plan proposes a mixed-use building that
includes facilities to serve the Shakespeare Theatre Company (STC) and residential uses. These facilities will primarily include
nonprofit administrative office space, educational space, rehearsal space, and production space. The residential component
will include 136 dwelling units, 93 of which will be market rate, 9 of which will be inclusionary zoning, and 34 of which will be
designated for housing STC actors and fellows. Figure 6 shows the proposed site plan. Parking and loading access to the site
will be from an existing curb cut along 6th Street.
Loading
According to DC zoning requirements, the residential use is required to provide (1) 55 loading berth and one (1) 20
service/delivery space. No loading is required for the STC uses. Alternatively, the development proposed to include one (1)
30 loading berth and one (1) 20 service/delivery space.
Based on the experience of residential building managers that manage buildings with the District and previous studies
performed by Gorove/Slade, rental apartments have an average turnover of 18 months, with two trucks per turnover (one
move out and one move in). Based on this information and the proposed development program of 136 apartment style
residential units, there will be approximately 181 deliveries per year or less than one delivery per day for the residential land
use. The specific loading needs of STC will vary from day to day, but the majority of the loading activity can be accommodated
in the 20 service/delivery space. Therefore the proposed amount of loading facilities will be sufficient to accommodate all
loading and service demand. Additionally, the size of the residential units will not require deliveries from trucks larger than
the 30 loading berth can accommodate (i.e. large box trucks). Of note, a detailed loading management plan will be assembled
for the CTR that will outline the specific operations of the site, particularly in regards to STC.
As shown in the Technical Attachments, 30 truck maneuvers into and out of the loading docks can be easily made from 6th
Street and based on the orientation of the docks, can accommodate head-in/head-out maneuvers. 20 trucks are also shown
easily maneuvering into the service/delivery space even when the 30 bay is occupied by a truck.
Parking
The parking proposed for this project includes 70 parking spaces in a below-ground parking structure accessed from 6th Street.
Based on the current District zoning laws, and assuming the STC space can be allocated as a mixture of institutional and office
space, the following outlines the parking requirements for all land uses of the development:
Residential 34 spaces
Non Profit Office 16 spaces
Art Space 9 spaces
Education Space 9 spaces
By supplying 70 spaces the development will satisfy zoning requirements. The development proposes to allocate 36 of these
spaces to residential uses and 34 of these spaces to STC uses. Of the 34 spaces allocated to STC, there will be 22 spaces (11
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 14
February 1, 2016
in each row) that will be in tandem. It should be noted that although the apartments allocated for STC actors are included in
the zoning requirements, no parking will be allocated to these units unless excess parking is available. Therefore, the 102
rental apartments will be using the 36 parking spaces. This amounts to a parking ratio of 0.35 which is slightly lower than
typical parking demand observed in the District, but expected to be sufficient given the proximity of the site to Metrorail and
Metrobus.
Pick-Up/Drop-Off
The largest pick-up/drop-off demand for the site comes from the Summer Camp offered by STC from June to August. There
are designated pick-up/drop-off times from 9:45 to 10:15 AM and 4:45 to 5:15 PM. Based on information provided from STC,
it is assumed that approximately 49 campers will need to be dropped off and picked up over each half hour period. Other
classes/events offered by STC may also require pick-up/drop-off spaces but to a much lesser degree and not at the same time
as the Summer Camp.
The existing curbside management of the roadways surrounding the site were collected as shown on Figure 7. The portion of
6th Street adjacent to the site is zoned as RPP and the portion of Eye Street adjacent to the site is zoned as enhanced RPP.
Further down Eye Street there is a Metrobus zone and pick-up/drop-off zones used by the adjacent Amidon-Bowen
Elementary School. Sharing the adjacent schools pick-up/drop-off zone was evaluated as an option, but was deemed
unfeasible because the loading zone is only in effect on school days and because a pick-up/drop-off zone in this location
would be located too far from the STC building access. Because this pick-up/drop-off zone is catered to children attending a
summer camp, safety concerns arise from dropping off and picking up too far from the entrance.
Based on this knowledge and the proposed STC building access, it is proposed that pick-up/drop-off activity take place along
6th Street. This would require the RPP spaces along the east side of 6th Street to be converted to STC use on either a permanent
or temporary basis, depending on further analysis of the needs of the site. Regardless of whether or not the curbside is
permanently dedicated to STC uses, parking would be available to residents in the evenings and overnight.
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 15
February 1, 2016
Figure 6: Site Plan
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 16
February 1, 2016
Figure 7: Existing and Proposed Curbside Management
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
Page 17
February 1, 2016
CONCLUSIONS
This Review concludes that:
The site is well-served by existing public transit service and has access to well-connected pedestrian and bicycle
facilities;
The site is expected to generate a manageable amount of auto and non-auto trips, with a much lower vehicular trip
generation than that of former uses on the site;
The site design takes advantage of the existing curb cut for both parking and loading access;
The proposed parking supply meets zoning requirements and although the Applicant is requesting loading relief, the
proposed loading plan is expected to accommodate all loading demand; and
A pick-up/drop-off area is proposed along 6th Street that will serve STC during the day and residents in the evening
and overnight.
Gorove/Slade
www.goroveslade.com
PROPOSED BENEFITS
BENEFIT RECIPIENTS
SHARED SPACES
1.
2.
Allow the free use of the assembly spaces/conference

rooms for community meetings during reasonable
weekday evening, and weekend daytime hours for
community meetings free of charge so long as STC
staff is available to open and close the space and the
space is not in use by STC.
Southwest
Community
Host an open house at the Property (to include

evening tours of costume fabrication shop and
rehearsal facilities with activities for families) in
coordination with SW ArtsFest
Southwest
residents
SW ArtsFest
SUPPORT FOR SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY

3.
For a period of five years following PUD approval,

STC shall provide an annual monetary contribution
to SW ArtsFest equal to the lesser of (1) Twenty
Percent (20%) of the annual budget of SW ArtsFest,
or (2) $2,500.00
SW ArtsFest
4.
Reserve tickets and gift certificates for adult Master

Acting Classes and Camp Shakespeare for Southwest
Community special events and raffles. The tickets
and gift certificates will be provided upon
appropriate request made by organizers of such
events to STC and subject to availability
Southwest
residents
5.
Provide scholarships to sponsor up to 10 low-income

children ages 5-17 to attend the two-week, full-day
Shakespeare Theater summer camp
Children in the
Southwest
6.
Reserve a number of discounted tuition spots for

Adult Master Acting Classes for members of the
Southwest Community who apply for such
discounted tuition by the advertised deadline
Adults in the
Southwest
Community
7.
Coordinate with Friends of the Southwest Duck Pond

for programming of arts events at the Duck Pond,
including participating in the Friends of the
Southwest Duck Pond Community Day.
Southwest Duck
Pond
Southwest
Community
8.
STC will participate in and financially support the

annual SW ArtsFest
Southwest
Community
9.
Reserve free tickets for Southwest residents to the

Academy
of
Classical
Acting
showcase
performances
Southwest
Residents
10.
STC will advertise in The Southwester with four onehalf page advertisements for at least one year
The Southwester
11.
Host tours of STC facilities for local schools and

community associations
Southwest
Community
Amidon Bowen ES
Jefferson Academy
MS
Others
ARTS EDUCATION
12.
Offer free tickets for special STC events that can be

raffled off at Southwest Community events
13.
Distribute free tickets to Ward 6 Night Free For All

performances at Sidney Harman Hall
14.
Invite classes from Jefferson Academy Middle

School and Amidon-Bowen Elementary School, as
well as community associations, for annual tours of
the Lansburgh Theatre, Sidney Harman Hall, and
Development, once operational
Offer to perform in-school performances of A

Midsummer Nights Dream and The Tiny
Tempest at Jefferson Academy Middle School and
Amidon-Bowen Elementary School
15.
16.
Provide Jefferson Academy Middle School with

District Shakespeare events and activities
17.
Provide Southwest Community educators priority

invitation to Teacher Appreciation Night at Sidney
Harman Hall
Southwest
Community
District Residents
Others
Ward 6 Residents
Southwest
Community
Amidon-Bowen
Elementary
Jefferson Academy
Southwest
Community
Amidon-Bowen
Elementary
Jefferson Academy
Southwest
Community
Jefferson Academy
Teachers in the
Southwest
Community
501 EYE STREET SW

The Bard, a joint development between Erkiletian Development Company and The Shakespeare Theatre Company
Community Outreach
Public and Community Meetings
MEETING
DATE
April 24,
2014
ORGANIZATION
ATTENDEES
INFORMATION SHARED/NOTES
Southwest Neighborhood
Kael Anderson,
Assembly (SWNA) leadership SWNA
Cecile Chen, SWNA
Dat Ngo, STC
Dan Stuver, SBA
Kinley Bray, AF
SWNA Board
Chris Jennings, STC
Dat Ngo, STC
Dan Stuver, SBA
Kinley Bray, AF
Kael Anderson,
SWNA
Cecile Chen, SWNA
Donna Purchase,
SWNA
Saadia Athias, SWNA
Kenneth Prater,
SWNA
Thelma Jones, SWNA
Discussion of preservation/demolition issues, program for

STC, market rate housing, shared early massing concept
June 9, 2014
ANC 6D
Kinley Bray, AF
Attend ANC 6D meeting and participate in discussion

regarding raze permit, timeline for development of STC
plans and pursuit of project
June 19,
2014
ANC SMD
Chris Jennings, STC

Elizabeth Wilcox,
JMZ
Discussion of STC program, needs, site constraints,

demolition/preservation issues, preliminary community
benefits from STC (not including developer contributions)
May 14,
2014
Discussion of demolition/preservation issues, building

design, shared first massing concept, discussion of
parking, number of units, height and density; adjourned
with commitment to return to talk about building design
and community benefits
Dan Stuver, SBA

Sam Marrero , SMD
Commissioner 6D01
Tim Fowler, STC
Presentation by OP of Draft SW Small Area Plan
Stefanie Erkiletian,
recommendations, small group conversations with SWNA
EDC
and ANC members
Kevin DeSouza, EDC
Kinley Bray, AF
Office of Planning SW
Small Area Plan Team
Over 100 neighbors in
SW, including:
Roger Moffatt, ANC
6D Chair
Andy Litsky, ANC 6D
Vice Chair
SWNA Board
June 25,
2014
Office of Planning & SW

Neighbors
July 15,
2014
SWNA leadership
Kael Anderson,
SWNA
Kinley Bray, AF
Discussion regarding landmark nomination, potential

withdrawal of same in consideration for negotiated
community benefits package, STC/EDC participation in
SWNA community forum, schedule in-person meeting
with SWNA
July 21,
2014
Near Southeast/Southwest
Community Benefits
Coordinating Council
Ruth Hamilton, Chair

Felicia Couts
Barbara Ehrlich
Rick Bardach
Debra Frazier
Carolyn Mitchell
Chris Jennings, STC
Bill Denton, EDC
Kinley Bray, AF
General introduction, discussion of timeline & process for

development, impact of landmark
July 24,
2014
SWNA
Kael Anderson,
SWNA
Meeting to discuss coordination on community forum

7/28/14, potential withdrawal of landmark nomination in
2
Cecille Chen, SWNA

Chris Jennings, STC
Bill Denton, EDC
Kinley Bray, AF
Coordinated by
SWNA
exchange for negotiated community benefits package,

including funding for SW Historic District study &
application ($90K)
Presentation by SWNA on sites history, Presentation by
STC and EDC on potential development, STC program,
development process; Q&A by neighbors
July 28,
2014
Public Meeting
August 4,
2014
Waterfront Gateway
Neighborhood Association,
WGNA
Townhouse Management I
(TMI), Townhouse
Management IV (TMI IV),
SWNA
All WGNA Board

Members invited
General introduction, discussion of timeline & process for

development, impact of landmark
Leadership &
interested neighbors in
townhouses across 6th
street
Discussion of SWNA Agreement terms, communication,

charrette
November
21, 2014
General Community
Open forum
Listening session to discuss height, density, community

benefits concerns in advance of finalizing plans
June 4, 2015
ANC Commissioners
Meeting to outline process for moving forward, strategy

for working together on new design
July 1, 2015
Telephone Town Hall
Andy Litsky, SMD

6D04
Marjorie Lightman,
SMD 6D01
Bill Denton, EDC
Chris Jennings, ETC
PUBLIC Invited
July 9, 2015
PUBLIC KIOSK Mtg.
Public Invitation
Present Updated Plans
July 11,
2015
PUBLIC KIOSK Mtg.
Public Invitation
Present Updated Plans
September
11, 2014
Explain Project and hear from community
August 10,
2015
Small Group Meeting
Community
Stakeholders
and Design Team
Open Dialogue
September
24, 2015
Small Group Meeting
Discussion regarding massing, present multiple design

options and receive feedback
February 1,
2016
Public Meeting
Community
Stakeholders and
Design Team
Public Invitation
February 16,
2016
Public Meeting
Public Invitation
Introduce the new design and discuss the Project
Introduce the new design and discuss the Project
Key:
AF: Arent Fox
EDC: Erkiletian Development Company
JMZ: JM Zell Partners, Ltd.
SBA: Shalom Baranes
STC: Shakespeare Theatre Company

The Bard PUD and Exhibits

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Bard PUD and Exhibits

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE BARD, A JOINT DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN ERKILETIAN DEVELOPMENT

COMPANY AND THE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE, LLC

APPLICATION TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ZONING COMMISSION FOR

The Bard, a joint development between

Shalom Baranes Associates,

Stoiber & Associates, PC

LAND USE COUNSEL:

Architectural Drawings; Elevations; Photographs of the

Zoning Data Development Table

Surveyors Plat of the Subject Property

Preliminary Transportation Review Letter

Agent Authorization Letter

Map Amendment and Consolidated PUD Forms

Certificate of Notice, Notice of Intent, and

Proposed Public Benefits

Community Outreach Summary

Summary of Requested Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 7

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Site History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Surrounding Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Transit Rich Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

THE PROPOSED PUD PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Project Goals and Objectives and the Benefits

Project Description History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Current Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Development Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Flexibility Under the PUD Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

PLANNING ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Land Use Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38

Zoning Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

Environmental Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

The Impact of the Project under Section 2403.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Not Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan Under Section 2403.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Other Application Filing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Public Benefits and Project Amenities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

District-Wide Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50

Compliance with Area Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Compliance with Southwest Neighborhood Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57

VIII. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62

Summary of Requested Action

The Applicant proposes to construct a mixed-use building (Proposed Development or

Since 2007, the Barracks Row

STC selected Erkiletian Development

Company, a family-owned and -run business specializing in multifamily housing, to be its

governments make them leaders in smart, sustainable development.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA

The Boys Club included a gymnasium,

The Hawthorne School acquired the Property in 1961,

The area surrounding the Property is experiencing a refocused surge in development

These townhomes were

The two office

Zoning Commission Order No. 02-38.

THE PROPOSED PUD PROJECT

Project Description History

Initial Project Design - Unbridled Expectation

Recalibrated Project Proposal

Further design modifications were made over a period of three months,

The Applicant anticipates further engagement with SWNA,

Current Project Description

The building will house STCs world-renowned costume

Inclusionary Zoning Compliance