I think we've got a a new area concern where there will be strong feelings by a number of people. The Post is carrying a story today on the front page of the Metro section about George Washington University purchasing The Gallery apartment building to house excess students that it can't accomodate on-campus. (The reason they have the space problem is because of complaints and civic action by residents in Foggy Bottom.)

I've already received two calls on the story from angry neighbors. While I doubt there is anything we can do about the purchase, there is certainly something we can do about how this was done and what will happen next.

Quickly here are the issues that have come tomy mind:

1) While the story says that GWU is reserving 125 of the apartments for students, there is no cap and GWU in the future apparently has the option to fill up the place as a dorm, except for the "moderate housing" units.
2) Noise, traffic and litter problems. Will the building continue to be operated as a luxury apartment building or a dorm?
3) Is there an occupany per apartment limit and if so, what is it?
4) Who do neighbors complain to at GWU if there are problems?
5) How could the County consent to this signficant change in our community without the courtesy of checking in with the Civic Association?

Should the Board take action? Send a strong letter/e-mail to the County Board? Provide a copy to The Post? Demand a neighborhood
meeting with GWU officials?

The Atrium's annual meeting is coming up next Wednesday and it would be helpful if we could tell folks the Civic Association is moving on this.

John has posted a good set of issues. I would also add to the list:

6) What are the real estate tax implications. Did our county just loose a huge amount of county real estate tax to accomodate a DC University's housing problems?

7) What are the effects on the BID. Will GW still pay into the BID, a key initiatived to the long term viability of Rosslyn?

I posted the message sent out by Rosslyn Renaissance to the "Gallery" message thread in hopes that the members of our civic association will voice their concerns and ideas. Shall we move the discussion to this public area?

If we do, then anyone at the Atrium can publicly voice their concerns and ideas and we can point the officials to this discussion and use this discussion as a basis to work with the county and GW University officials.

Paul

Paul,

I'm fine with opening your opening up the discussion to the full Association. May help pick up interest in the site.

I would think that real estate taxes would still be paid, especially since GWU is a DC university, not VA. Plus I can't imagine the County withholding its objection if it were going to lose tax revenues. David Briggs told me there should be no change in their contributing to the BID as well. I also understand that BID and Rosslyn Renaissance board members are concerned about this move.

It's likely a good idea to talk this over with GWU, maybe get some issues resolved and a communication started.

Also, if the county knew about this and didn't tell us then that's a problem. But I'm unsure that that the county has dropped the ball as it's not clear from the article that the county has been involved.

Does a switch from luxury to student apts. require a zoning change?

Mark

I agree with the specific concerns listed above, but I think the problems with the GW proposal are even worse. The potential that the Gallery would effectively be converted into a college dormitory is fundamentally inconsistent with the "luxury apartment" proposal which the County Board approved. If the Post accurately reported the story, this is a proposal that we will need to fight. It could have a devastating effect on both our neighborhood quality of life and our property values.

Ron Carlee has copied the association on his response to David Briggs. I copy those remarks below, with the comment that the civic association will certainly want to have discussions with county officials and GW officials.

David,
Thanks for copying me on your e-mail to the County Board. I was surprised by the Washington Post article this morning and had placed calls before 8:00 a.m. What was reported is very different from what had been represented to me about a possible GWU purchase in Rosslyn. We will aggressively follow-up and ensure that there are discussions with Rosslyn Renaissance and the civic associations. I assure you that will insist that all site plan conditions are fully met. -Ron

Ron Carlee
County Manager
2100 Clarendon Blvd - Suite 302
Arlington, VA 22201
Telephone 703-228-3120
Fax 703-228-3295

To: Interested Parties
From: Ron Carlee, County Manager
Subj: GWU Purchase of The Gallery

As I reported in a previous e-mail, I, too, was concerned about the Washington Post article today. I contacted Joel Trachtenberg President of GWU, and explained that the GWU purchase of The Gallery could be problematic to the community based on what was reported in the Post, which was different than a very recent briefing that I had from staff on their possible acquisition of the building. Dr. Trachtenberg followed-up our conversation with the following e-mail, which provides the full context of GWU's plans. Please circulate this in the community so that people have accurate information. Bob Brosnan of the Planning staff will be contacting Rosslyn Renaissance and civic associations to arrange for any detailed briefings that you may desire. Also, please communicate to him any concerns or questions that you may have. As long as GWU fulfills the commitments (letter and intent) of the site plan, there would appear to be no reason not to welcome them into our community. Finally, since the question has arisen in calls to the County, please note that the tax status of the property would not change.

****************************************************

The Honorable Ronald Carlee
County Manager of Arlington

Dear Ron:

I sure do understand why some of your constituents may have been
concerned after reading today's Washington Post article about George
Washington University's building initiatives in Arlington. It seemed
provocative to me, too.

I hope to be as reassuring as possible about our plans. It is our
intention to be as affirmative and positive and agreeable a resident in
Arlington as it is humanly possible to be. Specifically about the
matter at hand, GW is doing its very best to comply with a very strict
order from the District of Columbia which prohibits some people from
living in certain parts of the city merely because they are students. A
Federal Trial Court found this order unconstitutional and we proceeded
accordingly. However, the District appealed and only in February a U.S.
Circuit Court reversed the Trial Court.

We are in the process of constructing and acquiring facilities to house
the students in question in permitted areas in the District of
Columbia. Two buildings are under construction on campus even as I
dictate this note. One will open in September 2003, another in
September 2004. And we're looking at additional residential endeavors
in the prescribed area on land that we presently own with the hope that
we can build even more student housing if necessary, perhaps on an
expedited basis.

Our proposed purchase of the Gallery in Arlington should provide some
relief to us in the short term. We contemplate that the population in
the building will represent the entire University community"”some
undergraduate students, some graduate and professional students (law,
medicine), some faculty, some staff, as well as the general public.
Initially there may be more undergraduates than others, but the number
should decrease as we build and open the on-campus facilities mentioned
above. Also, it may be worth noting that the undergraduates who will be
in Arlington will be upper classmen. In other words, no freshmen at
all. And very few sophomores. Perhaps none.

GW recognizes that the building is under site plan and intends to comply
fully with all site plan conditions. This includes a commitment to
assure that the affordable housing units are made available to the
public as originally intended. The facility will be a professionally
run apartment building. It is not a dormitory. Residents will be on 12
month leases.

We would be pleased to meet with the community to further discuss our
plans. It is our intention to be full participants in Rosslyn. Our
goal is to set an example of what it means to be a good neighbor. We
believe we have gotten a bum rap in the District, but whatever the
merits of that issue may be, it has at a minimum made us even more
sensitive than usual about the need to be transparent and
accommodating. We look forward to working with you, your associates,
and the people of Rosslyn. We will not disappoint you.

Sincerely,

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
President


--
Betsy Francisco
Office of the President
George Washington University
2121 Eye Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052
(202) 994-6501




Ron Carlee
County Manager
2100 Clarendon Blvd - Suite 302
Arlington, VA 22201
Telephone 703-228-3120
Fax 703-228-3295

Subj: Re: GWU Proposed Acquisition of the Gallery at Rosslyn Apartment Building
Date: 04/19/2003 2:01:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Klmarcus
To: rbrosnan@co.arlington.va.us
CC: Kathweath, Ddake1@co.arlington.va.us, Dsun@co.arlington.va.us, Gacuri@co.arlington.va.us, Rcarle@co.arlington.va.us, CountyBoard@co.arlington.va.us, dbriggs@hklaw.com, Jwilson@co.arlington.va.us, Mferguson@co.arlington.va.us, Rtorre@co.arlington.va.us, SBell@co.arlington.va.us, befranci@gwu.edu, brian_coulter@jbg.com, seal.john@pbgc.gov, ccassidy@rossren.com, awasserman@smartplace.com, billb@westfieldrealty.com, shousept@winstarmail.com



Bob,

As I am sure you are now aware, the proposed GW purchase of the Gallery at Rosslyn is an issue of enormous concern for the North Rosslyn Civic Association and the surrounding homeowners' associations and residents. The county's apparent decision not to involve these resident groups in the decision-making process prior to the Washington Post's article raises serious questions for us as to whether the County Board's commitment to citizen participation is being honored here. More significantly, it is difficult to imagine how the new proposed use of the building could ever be consistent with both the residential character of the northwest Rosslyn area and the commitments made during the site plan process.

Ron Carlee has indicated that you would contact us regarding citizen concerns and that you would be interested in hearing the questions now being raised in our community. The following list is a sample of some of the issues which Rosslyn residents have recently raised about this proposal, based on comments which have been posted over the last 24-48 hours on the www.northrosslyn.org web forum:

1) While the story says that GWU is reserving 125 of the apartments for students, there is no cap and GWU in the future apparently has the option to fill up the place as a dorm, except for the "moderate housing" units.
2) Noise, traffic and litter problems. Will the building continue to be operated as a luxury apartment building or a dorm?
3) Is there an occupany per apartment limit and if so, what is it?
4) Who do neighbors complain to at GWU if there are problems?
5) How could the County consent to this signficant change in our community without the courtesy of checking in with the Civic Association?
6) What are the real estate tax implications. Did our county just loose a huge amount of county real estate tax to accomodate a DC University's housing problems?
7) What are the effects on the BID. Will GW still pay into the BID, a key initiatived to the long term viability of Rosslyn?
8) What did the county know about the GW plan, when did it know it, and why did it not contact the North Rosslyn Civic Association or our various neighborhood homeowners' associations and other affected groups?
9) Does a switch from luxury to student apts. require a zoning change?
10) Is this proposal consistent with representations made to the community and the County Board during the planning process, including representations as to the primary use of the building for luxury apartments?

Ron Carlee's recent email correspondence provides some assurance that he now intends to face this issue in a proactive manner and to involve the North Rosslyn Civic Association and other local citizen groups. Unfortunately, the Trachtenberg correspondence that I have seen does not assuage any of our concerns and only serves to confirm the accuracy of the Post report in various respects.

I would appreciate an opportunity to discuss these issues with you at your soonest availablity. I can be reached at 703-465-7963 and at kmarcus@northrosslyn.org.

Very truly yours,

Ken Marcus
President
North Rosslyn Civic Association

Ken,

1. FYI, Thursday, 24 April is the monthly ACRC meeting that some of us will be attending.
2. Looked on website, did not see the GWU / Gallery discussion, though it must be there.
a. The use of the Gallery (Twin Oaks) site for a college dormitory was the standing joke when the property was re-zoned to permit sky-scrappers. We knew the students were rich enough to rent the apartments, that there could be multiple students per apartment and each would have a car (BMW-Mercedes ...), but we didn't think they would buy the whole (?) place.
b. This is why we lobbied so hard to increase the number of parking spaces. Pre-lobby the ratio was less than one space per apartment – we got it up an astounding 1.1 spaces per apt. With 2 cars per apt. there will some 200 cars looking for parking on / near Ode / Colonial Terrace every night. Parking is already a zoo.
c. What is ground truth?

Thanks,



Ken, (Note 2)



Ok, I'm slow, I found the GWU article.



It's bait and switch, and railroad time all over again. The Board ran roughshod over all of the civic associations and the planning commission when they approved the current zoning change. They got re-elected anyway. They, after a few words of modest concern, will ride roughshod over us again. This pattern will continue until the county elects by district rather than all supervisors at large. Like DC, Taxation without representation, and we see it in Rosslyn all the time.



Perhaps all of the civic associations should weigh in. That the students are coming here after being dis-invited in Foggey Bottom speaks the exact concerns we made to the Board when the zoning was changed. They told us not to worry.



Ah shucks, why did we ever doubt them,



Joe

We have gotten GW's attention. GW's President, Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, has sent the following two letters in response to correspondence posted above:



April 21, 2003

Mr. Ken Marcus
President
North Rosslyn Civic Association

Dear Mr. Marcus:

Thanks for sending me a copy of your note to Ron Carlee.

I'm distressed that members of the North Rosslyn Civic Association are
outraged at the thought that GW students and faculty and staff might be
joining the community. The truth is I can't imagine why you would be
outraged, although I can imagine why you would be interested in perhaps
meeting with my colleagues and me to ask us questions that you might have
and to have our responses and perhaps our reassurances.

You say you have many concerns about the GW proposal which are not assuaged
by my letter. Please, please tell me what your concerns are. It may well
be that we can give you a responsive and satisfactory comfort factor.
Indeed, I like to think that if you get to know us, you'd not only conclude
that we are decent and upright people but that we are exactly the kind of
folk you'd want living in your neighborhood and participating in the good
works of your Association.

You make reference in your letter to the conversion of the Gallery from a
luxury apartment building into a college dormitory. That is exactly what we
are NOT proposing to do. We mean for it to be a luxury apartment building
which permits independent living by young adults -- some of whom are
upperclass undergraduate, graduate, and professional students -- by
professors, and by other university personnel. And non-university people as
well.

I look forward to our continuing dialogue. I know that you will keep an open
mind. I don't think we've given you any reason to doubt us. We come as
friends and rely on the reputation of Rosslyn as hospitable and fair.

Warm wishes.

Cordially,



Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
President

SJT/rlc

Subj: GWU Proposed Acquisition of the Gallery at Rosslyn Apartment Building
Date: 04/21/2003 4:40:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: rcalkins@gwu.edu
To: Klmarcus@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)




April 21, 2003

Mr. Ken Marcus
President
North Rosslyn Civic Association

Dear Mr. Marcus:

Thanks so much for sharing with me a copy of your April 19 letter to Bob
Brosnan in which you raise a variety of questions on behalf of the North
Rosslyn Civic Association about GW's plans for the Gallery.

I've read your ten questions. I think there are responses to each of them
individually and any other issues of which they may be symbolic. I'd be
pleased to meet with you and your associates to try to answer your concerns
and give you a comfort factor about GW's good faith. I'm sorry that my
earlier letter did not assuage any of your concerns. I meant my statement
that the building is under site plan and that the University intends to
comply fully with all site plan conditions to be a step in the right
direction. I had hoped that in saying the facility will be professionally
administered as an apartment building, that it was not a dormitory, that
residents would be on a 12-month lease would be reassuring. I didn't omit
anything that I thought might concern you, and now that I have your ten
points, I'd be pleased to respond fully and frankly in a manner that I hope
will give you reasons to welcome us as value-added neighbors.

All I'm asking is that you don't prejudge us. GW comes in peace. We intend
to be the very best community member you've ever seen. Give us a chance,
and I think we'll demonstrate that you don't have to believe everything you
read in The Washington Post.

All best wishes.

Cordially,



Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
President

SJT/rlc

County Official Bob Brosnan has ventured the following responses to the 10 questions presented in the correspondence posted above:



Mr. Marcus:

I I will try to answer as many questions as I can.


First, the County was not asked about a change to the building and was only informed that GW was considering acquiring the building for the use described by Joel Trachtenberg as opposed to the use as described in the Washington Post. If we had been informed that the acquisition was to take place for sure and a time we could have done a better job at letting the Rosslyn community know. Again, I think that the e-mail from Joel Trachtenberg summarizes their intended use which at this time does not appear to require any changes to zoning. There has been no process to determine a change in use uses nor are we sure one is warranted at this time. The community will be notified and will be involved if one is determined to be needed.



What we understand from conversations and the e-mail form Joel Trachtenberg is the following:



The Gallery was approved with 317 units, 38 of which were set aside as affordable housing.
GW has acquired the building and will use Bozzutto to manager the building.
GW will comply with the affordable housing requirements (38 units).
GW will lease to the private market (approx 100 units – exact number not clear at this time).
The remainder will be rented to students (Junior and Senior undergraduates, graduate students and professional students), faculty and staff.
All units will be rented under 12 month leases.
GW plans on using the availability of the units as a recruiting tool for faculty.


1) While the story says that GWU is reserving 125 of the apartments for students, there is no cap and GWU in the future apparently has the option to fill up the place as a dorm, except for the "moderate housing" units.



Answer: If the use is operated as a dorm with less than 12 month leases we can use our zoning authority to pursue that violation.



2) Noise, traffic and litter problems. Will the building continue to be operated as a luxury apartment building or a dorm?



Answer: As we understand, the building will be operated by Buzzotto management and will be operated as a rental building. Again, should this change to a use not authorized by zoning, we can pursue that violation.



3) Is there an occupancy per apartment limit and if so, what is it?



Answer: The definition of family is up to 4 unrelated individuals or more than two people related by blood or marriage. One family may occupy one unit. There may be further limitations under the building code depending on the square footage of each unit.



4) Who do neighbors complain to at GWU if there are problems?



Answer: I don't know the answer to this question and we will get a contact for the community One option would be to complain to the management company who are responsible for day-to-day management.



5) How could the County consent to this significant change in our community without the courtesy of checking in with the Civic Association?



Answer: As I stated above, the County has not consented to anything at this time. It appears from the information we have that the proposed sale and use are consistent with all zoning regulations and conditions of the site plan. We have not been asked for approval nor does it appear to be required.



6) What are the real estate tax implications. Did our county just loose a huge amount of county real estate tax to accommodate a DC University's housing problems?



Answer: The building will be taxed as any rental development in the County.



7) What are the effects on the BID. Will GW still pay into the BID, a key initiative to the long term viability of Rosslyn?



Answer: I don't know the answer to this question and will investigate it.



8) What did the county know about the GW plan, when did it know it, and why did it not contact the North Rosslyn Civic Association or our various neighborhood homeowners' associations and other affected groups?



Answer: The County knew that GW purchased the property when the article appeared in the Washington Post. The week before, GW approached the County to inform us that they were considering the purchase. At that time, based on their representations, no issues were identified.



9) Does a switch from luxury to student apts. require a zoning change?



Answer: From the information we have, it is not anticipated that any zoning change is required. As we get more information a final determination we will made. If a change is needed, the community will be notified.



10) Is this proposal consistent with representations made to the community and the County Board during the planning process, including representations as to the primary use of the building for luxury apartments?



Answer: It appears that the use will continue to be rental and GW has stated that they intend to comply with all conditions and requirements of the zoning.





In his e-mail, Joel Trachtenberg offers to meet with any group who is interested an this might be the best way for the community to assess their plans. Meanwhile, if I can answer any other questions or get more information I will be glad to.



My number is 703-228-3516



Bob Brosnan

GW has posted the following message on its website, indicating that it plans to place up to four (4) undergraduate students in each of 125 units.


The Gallery at Rosslyn Web Site

GW OFFERS A NEW AND STYLISH COED- AND INDEPENDENT-LIVING OPTION IN A SPECIAL PRE-LOTTERY DEAL EXCLUSIVELY FOR JUNIORS AND SENIORS.

Live in Rosslyn's finest and newest residence. Located just a few minutes walk from Georgetown shopping and a short Metro ride from the GW Foggy Bottom campus.

Act fast! ONLY 125 units available


2-3-4: Choose your own number of roommates to a maximum of four based on unit size!
12-month lease, with authorized summer subleasing option for qualified renters


Ideal for upperclassmen who want to avoid the Housing Selection anxiety of a high number!
Available to ALL rising GW juniors and seniors, first priority going to students with Housing

This issue points up the usefulness of our North Rosslyn community organization. As individuals we would not have had a chance to find out what was going on. As an organization, by contrast, the County answers our questions and the University gladly agrees to sit and talk.
Mark Antell

One of our members that is moving to The Gallery notified us today that GWU has withdrawn their offer to purchase The Gallery from Donohoe and that Bozzuto Management will continue leasing and managing the property. This information was provided to her by a representative from Bozzuto Management.

GW's President, Steve Trachtenberg, has confirmed this rumor to me. His Vice President for Government Affairs contacted me on Mr. Trachtenberg's behalf to let us know that they have completed their due dilligence and decided to retract their offer. Trachtenberg says that his decision was entirely based on economic circumstances. He has also asked that I convey to the North Rosslyn community that their decision was not based in any way on their view of Rosslyn. GW has conveyed this same information to the county manager as well.

Good news, but now I'm really worried. What does GW really know?

In this morning's Washington Post there was a brief article about GWU withdrawing their offer to purchased The Gallery.

I was partially misquoted in this article. Here is what was printed:

'Meanwhile, Rosslyn community leaders expressed mixed emotions about GWU's decision to pull out. Paul Derby, director and treasurer of the North Rosslyn Civic Association, said the group had been on the verge of drafting a memorandum welcoming GWU to the neighborhood. Some residents, though, had harbored concerns "mainly centered around fears of what would happen if a large undergraduate population were housed here," he said.'

At the beginning of the interview the reporter asked me how GWU's decision affected the community. My response was that we were in the process of drafting a memo of understanding for working (not welcoming) with the university on issues such as parking, noise, lease extension, etc. and since the university was not moving forward with the purchase we would probably not be producing the MOU.

To Ken / Paul and the other NRCA members:
It appears that the wisdom of starting the NRCA has born fruit in the GWU case. Thanks for your hard work.