12th And Allison Development In Nearby Michigan Park

St. Josephs Seminary
St. Joseph’s Seminary – view from Varnum Street, NE

In the last few months there has been a lot of neighborhood chatter about a proposed new development on the property of St. Joseph’s Seminary.  This land is just north of Brookland, around 12th and Webster/Allison Streets, next to Providence Hospital.  We don’t post about topics until we have something verified to refer readers to, and it looks like things are taking shape now. The developer is EYA, which also brought us the nearby Chancellor’s Row development, and they are calling this one “12th and Allison”.  From their website:

EYA is excited to share that we are partnering with the Josephites to create a new home community on a portion of the land around the St. Joseph Seminary in the beautiful Michigan Park neighborhood. We look forward to seeking community input and creating a plan that responds to this feedback and is compatible with the neighborhood.

Neighbors of St. Josephs have their own website here to share information, including a community survey:

We believe it is critical to document community concerns about EYA’s proposed development at St. Joseph’s Seminary. We have designed a comprehensive survey that is easy to answer and takes 10 minutes to complete.

The community website also has this informative presentation from EYA that provides a lot of preliminary details, including:

  • The PUD/Zoning request will be submitted this spring
  • The development will be townhomes/rowhouses
  • Construction is planned to begin fall 2017
  • Delivery of first homes fall 2018

The next community meeting about this development will be February 2, 2016 when EYA will present at the Michigan Park Citizens Association meeting at 7:00 PM, location TBD. We will let you when we hear anything notable.

6 thoughts on “12th And Allison Development In Nearby Michigan Park”

  1. This is exciting. I hope the developers are able to build this housing for our future neighbors without pointless and misguided neighborhood opposition.

  2. Point of order for the designers of the “comprehensive survey:” you’ve unfortunately made it extremely easy to discount the results of the survey by not allowing for any non-negative comments on the project. Will the questions posed actually gauge the community response to the project, or just one very narrow subsection?

    If you’re hoping the response data will be used in objective decisionmaking (neighborhood association, DC council, zoning, etc) then you might want to tone down the rhetoric so that it can be used at all. I’d hate to see all this work and passion go to waste.

    1. I also love the leading questions attempting to discourage new residents or those without direct experience with the seminary from even having an opinion.

      The seminary is willingly opting to sell this land. Blocking the project is not going to be respectful to the Josephites’ wishes no matter how it’s spun.

  3. Apparently, to paraphrase President Obama, “..the silly season has begun.” It would behoove the foregoing commentators to read (or have someone read aloud) the survey’s introduction. The Community Survey was designed to document the community’s concerns about EYA’s proposed development of 150 townhouses on the grounds of St. Joseph’s Seminary. It does precisely that.

    Contrary to the foregoing misrepresentations, the survey offers multiple opportunities for respondents to freely state their opinions (positive or negative) about the proposed development. And, respondents do. There are, for example, multiple open-ended items to which respondents
    can provide as lengthy a commentary as they wish. And, they do.

    Contrary to the foregoing misrepresentations, the structured items do not force a given response. If respondents do not hold a particular concern, for example, they are free to skip it or, in more professional terms, choose not to endorse it. And, they do.

    Perhaps what these commentators actually find objectionable is the uncomfortable realization that theirs is the minority position.

    Assuming that one is actually interested in substance, the more meaningful question is why residents felt it necessary to develop a survey in order to document community concerns about the proposed development? Perhaps it’s because, across three community meetings, the overwhelming sentiment expressed by residents did not favor EYA’s proposed plan.

    Perhaps it’s because residents present at those meetings were concerned that there would be attempts to denigrate, distort, or even suppress their opposition to the proposed development.

    Considering the comments posted above, I’d say the that community’s concerns were not entirely unjustified.

    1. Are the opinions of those favorable to the creation of these much-needed homes going to be dismissed if residents have not lived in DC long enough? Is that going to be an important element in massaging the data into a claim about the survey results? Just curious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *