Zoning commission accepts late amendment, advances Living Classrooms design review for Yards Park

The Zoning Commission on Dec. 8 accepted a late amendment and moved forward with design review for Living Classrooms’ planned three‑story building at Yards Park (Parcel P3), advancing the application toward final action in January.

Chair Anthony Hood opened the virtual hearing and outlined procedure. Applicant counsel (identified in the transcript as Mr. Abitable) asked the commission to accept an amendment filed less than 30 days before the hearing that reframes a previously discussed design flexibility as a variance from the rules of measurement so the project’s height can be measured from finished grade. The applicant said the change is required because the site will be elevated 6–7 feet above existing grade to get out of the floodplain, which affects how height limits operate in the waterfront zone.

Commissioners asked for legal and Office of Planning (OP) confirmation that the variance route was procedurally appropriate. Legal counsel advised that a variance is the clearer procedural path in this zone. Commissioner Imamura moved to accept the amendment and Vice Chair Miller seconded; by roll call the commission approved the waiver 5–0. The clerk recorded the vote as Imamura — yes; Miller — yes; Hood — yes; Wright — yes; Stidham — yes.

In a concise presentation, the applicant described the project as a three‑story, multiuse pavilion building for Living Classrooms that includes education and workforce development spaces and a ground‑floor restaurant. The submission identified several areas of requested flexibility: lot occupancy (the parcel would read as about 65% coverage by itself but about 17–18% when measured across the overall Yards Park parcels), relief from a closed‑court width requirement, a waterfront setback shorter than the typical 100‑foot requirement, reduced clear ground‑floor height for some tenant spaces (the regulation otherwise requires 14 feet), and a height variance driven by elevating the site to address floodplain constraints.

Applicant representatives stressed programmatic and structural reasons for the height request, noting classroom and workforce spaces, interstitial structural/mechanical needs and an intent to match the scale of nearby pavilion buildings. The project team said it has coordinated with the General Services Administration (GSA) and received a 35% design approval from GSA, and that it worked with the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and the Commission of Fine Arts (CFA) on design and landscape issues. The architect described thermally engineered wood cladding, native and pollinator plantings (per NCPC), terraces that can serve as outdoor classrooms and an intention to continue material testing for durability in a maritime environment.

District agencies briefed the commission. The District Department of Transportation (DDOT) testified that it supports the application subject to a condition requiring implementation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan for the life of the project; the Office of Planning reported it supports the variance from the rules of measurement and said it will examine whether the measurement rules for waterfront zones merit future revision. Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEMA) raised the need for a site‑specific evacuation plan; the applicant agreed to prepare and submit an evacuation plan as a post‑hearing filing.

Vice Chair Miller noted an ANC 6/8F letter in the record reporting unanimous ANC support and urged the commission to give it great weight. Staff reported there were no registered public commenters for support, opposition, or undeclared testimony at the hearing.

Commissioners discussed scheduling; the commission set a schedule for post‑hearing exchange of materials so agencies can file comments and the applicant may respond. The chair and applicant agreed to file post‑hearing materials (agencies by Jan. 12; applicant response by Jan. 19) with final action targeted for Jan. 29 at 4:00 p.m.

The hearing record will include the applicant’s promised post‑hearing submissions: an evacuation plan, responses to agency comments (including the Department of Energy and Environment/DOEE memo filed late in the record), and the GSA 35% design approval letter. The commission adjourned after thanking participants.

What the commission decided: the body voted unanimously to waive the <30‑day amendment rule and accept the applicant’s amended filing; the commission did not take final action on the design review or the substantive relief requests at this meeting and will consider final action at the January meeting after receiving post‑hearing materials and outstanding agency responses.

Reported by the commission’s record and hearing transcript.