Norton Objects to Proposed Sites for New Marine Barracks (09/02/2010)
Norton Objects to Proposed Sites for New Marine Barracks
September 2, 2010
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Office of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) released a letter today from Norton to Brigadier General Robert R. Ruark, Assistant Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics, objecting to the potential sites selected by the U.S. Marine Corps (Marines) as the location to replace the D.C. Marine Barracks known as Building 20. Norton objected to the criteria the Marines seem to beusing to narrow site selection, and wrote that conveniences for the Marines appear to havetrumped their consideration of other possible sites. She objected to the two potential sites, Square 929, where Dogma runs a dog day care business, and to Square 930, where the community has converted a former drug haven into a park and community garden where residents grow fruits and vegetables.
In her letter, Norton wrote,"Your emphasis apparently has been on selecting a site in close proximity to the Marine Annex and Barracks Row, a convenient walk for the Marines, whose training is perhaps the most rigorous of all the armed services. Notions of convenience for your Marines should not supersede important community concerns, including consideration of the convenience for the community and the displacement of important community assets." Norton, a member of the Homeland Security Committee, said that she agreed that the barracks cannot remain in the present location, andsuggested relocation toan empty lot on 5th Street, between K and L Streets, next to the Marine Annex parking lot.
New security standards issued by the U.S. Department of Defense require Building 20, which houses about 250 Marines, to be moved from its current location to a new site that is at least 82 feet from the street.
Norton's letter follows.
----
August 31, 2010
Brigadier General Robert R. Ruark
Assistant Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics (Facilities)
Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps2 Navy Annex, Room 1100Washington, DC 20380-1775
Dear Brigadier General Ruark,
I am writing to express my concern about potential sites being considered by the U.S. Marine Corps (Marines) to replace the barracks at Building 20 in Washington, D.C. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee and as chair of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, which has jurisdiction over the General Services Administration, I fully understand that Building 20, between 8th Street, Southeast and the Southeast-Southwest Freeway, is not suitable for use as barracks under the Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection standards. Moreover, I appreciate that you continue to be in touch with my office through Robert White, my aide who handles this issue and briefs me on his meetings with you, and particularly that you have undertaken to include the community in the site selection process, for the first time, with the Community Integrated Master Plan (CIMP). As you will recall, I spoke at the initial community meeting at Eastern Market when you introduced this issue to our community, and I encouraged the community to work with you throughout the process. However, despite your outreach, I join with some in the community who are very concerned about the apparent outcomes, which show that due consideration has not been given to the community’s concerns. Instead, factors such as the convenience for the Marines of being located near current facilities appear to have governed your final choices in replacing Building 20.As I understand it, the Marines have narrowed their site selection to two locations, Squares 929 and/or 930. I personally have visited Squares 929 and 930 and the surrounding area. These sites certainly are convenient for the Marines, but their selection threatens significant community and business investments. For instance, years ago, the park located in this area was so neglected that it deteriorated into a hot spot for drug use until members of the community worked with the Marines and the D.C. government to restore it to a useful green space. The community has gone even further and made part of the park into a community garden where many residents are growing fruits and vegetables, with a waiting list of residents. Today, the park is vastly improved and attractive asset for the community. To make things worse, Dogma, a business that has been in the community for over a decade and must have land in order to operate, also is threatened by the proposed site locations.
You pledged to work with the community to select a mutually beneficial site, but this pledge appears to be fading. Therefore, I must ask you not to proceed further until there is greater clarification of outstanding questions. I must know why the Marines do not propose to build on the empty lot located on 5th Street, between K and L Streets, which abuts the parking garage next to the Marine Annex building itself. Please detail the criteria being used in selecting sites and the weight given to each criterion. Do you plan to use both Squares 929 and 930? If so, why and where would you replace the land at a minimum one-to-one ratio as promised? Is it true that the Marines are now proposing to build family housing in addition to barracks? If this is so, this project has been misrepresented to me and to the community, because only barracks were discussed at the outset. As you can see, there is no room on Capitol Hill for the barracks, much less for other housing. Your emphasis apparently has been on selecting a site in close proximity to the Marine Annex and Barracks Row, a convenient walk for the Marines, whose training is perhaps the most rigorous of all the armed services. Notions of convenience for your Marines should not supersede important community concerns, including consideration of the convenience for the community and the displacement of important community assets.
We have cooperated in your search for barracks in this congested city, where locating land for housing and businesses for our own citizens is very difficult, especially on Capitol Hill, where almost all of the usable land is occupied. You vowed at the start to work closely with the community on this project. We intend to hold you to that commitment. Time is short because we understand that you are closing in on a final plan. I ask that you promptly respond to each of the issues raised in this letter.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Holmes Norton