Opinion ID: 4542463
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Zoning Commission Hearing

Text: The Zoning Commission heard the case on March 19, 2018. The Commission received letters of support and opposition from community members. In explaining why the case was being conducted as a rulemaking instead of a contested case, Chairman Anthony Hood said, “[t]his is not about any particular case or project. This is a policy [question] whether or not the FLUM, the future land use map, is inconsistent with the zoning.” Chairman Hood also stated, “[w]e’re here to talk about a policy question. We’re here to talk about a rezoning, changing the zoning, not about any project, who wants to do what, who didn’t do what.” ANC 8A zoning consultant Laura Richards, ANC Commissioner Muhammad, and other interested residents provided testimony in support of the downzoning. Commissioner Muhammad asserted that “Allowing for the PDR-1 10 zone to remain in this area will permit the encroachment of an inappropriate commercial use in residential areas. The PDR-1 zoning allows development that will destroy the walkability of the community adjacent to a national park and causes a pedestrian safety hazard.” A commissioner from a nearby single member district, who referenced PAL’s plan for the property, testified: [W]e have a homeless population that has been becoming more popular in the Anacostia park area. And I also know that storage facilities like this are often used as homes for homeless people. . . . I support the rezoning, because I don’t want to see that population continue to grow and the kids decide to make those shelter[s] their home. A few residents testifying in support of the downzoning also referenced the proposed storage facility. One local homeowner said, “the storage unit . . . the project would be a huge eyesore. . . . this particular situation could bring crime, rodents, abandonment, squatters, lights blaring all night, movements all type of hours.” Another Fairlawn community resident said, “Two years ago we said ‘no’ to the storage facility. We have not changed our minds. We still say no.” PAL’s founder and managing partner began his testimony by informing the Commission, “I want to provide some background and my company’s plans for the property including an explanation as to the benefits a self-storage facility would have for the community and the negative impact the proposed downzoning could 11 have on Palatine and its investors.” Chairman Hood interrupted this testimony, stating “we’re not talking about a project so if you can leave out self-storage, no storage, whatever storage. Let’s talk about the map amendment. Let’s talk about what’s being proposed to rezone.” PAL’s founder responded, “[s]elf-storage is a PDR use. It’s an allowable use in the PDR zone. The Zoning Commission should not evaluate this map amendment in a vacuum. . . . A map amendment would not be consistent with the Comp[prehensive] Plan policy because it will create a nonconforming use.” When a member of PAL’s investment team spoke about the benefits of a self-storage facility, Chairman Hood reiterated the Commission’s position: “This is a rulemaking. This is not a contested case. . . . If you want to talk about a self-storage, no storage, whatever, go right ahead because I can guarantee you . . . we’re going to stick with the issue.” Following comments by the Commission’s Vice Chair and the other Commissioners, the Commission unanimously voted to approve the downzoning, pending a 30-day comment period.