[Senate Report 112-154]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
112th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 112-154
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 352
TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
H.R. 2297
TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
March 29, 2012.--Ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska JERRY MORAN, Kansas
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Beth M. Grossman, Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Elyse F. Greenwald, Professional Staff Member
Nickolas A. Rossi, Minority Staff Director
Mark B. LeDuc, Minority General Counsel
Daniel F. Jenkins, Minority Legislative Correspondent
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 352
112th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 112-154
======================================================================
TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHWEST WATERFRONT IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
_______
March 29, 2012.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Lieberman, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2297]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (H.R. 2297) to promote
the development of the Southwest waterfront in the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that
the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose and Summary..............................................1
II. Background and Need..............................................2
III. Legislative History..............................................3
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis......................................4
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact..................................4
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................5
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............5
I. Purpose and Summary
The Southwest Waterfront is a 27 acre plot of land within
the District of Columbia which was transferred from the federal
government to the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land
Agency in 1960. The legislation which transferred this land
delineated the boundaries of the Southwest Waterfront, but
those boundaries have since shifted, which means a few parcels
of land are not clearly owned by the District in statute. In
addition, the legislation restricted D.C.'s ability to use the
Southwest Waterfront. The District of Columbia now seeks to
develop this property through a new public-private partnership.
To facilitate such development, H.R. 2297 clarifies the
ownership of those parcels not included in the original
legislation and grants D.C. greater flexibility on the
disposition of the land.
II. Background and Need for Legislation
In 1956, the National Capital Planning Commission finalized
an urban renewal plan for the redevelopment of the Southwest
Waterfront in the District of Columbia. In order to execute the
plan, in 1960 Congress passed, and President Eisenhower signed
into law, a bill to transfer all right, title and interest of
the United States with regard to the Southwest Waterfront to
the District of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency.
Technically, the land was conveyed from the federal government
to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, the three-
person federal board overseeing
the District prior to the enactment of the Home Rule Act. The
legislation, P.L. 86-736, delineated the boundaries of the
transferred land as:
. . . the area bounded by the east line of Fourteenth
Street Southwest, the existing southerly (or westerly)
building line of Maine Avenue Southwest, the northerly
line of Fort Lesley J. McNair at P Street Southwest,
and the bulkhead line established pursuant to the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (30 Stat. 1151), as
amended, together with any land area extending
channelward from said bulkhead line.
The urban renewal plan took nearly ten years to implement.
During construction, the streets and bulkhead line which served
as the boundary lines of the Southwest Waterfront in P.L. 86-
736 changed slightly. For example, by 1966, a straight bulkhead
had been built along the Washington Channel, replacing the
irregular bulkhead which had been the previous boundary. In the
construction of this bulkhead, land was created that did not
previously exist, and therefore was not clearly transferred to
D.C. in P.L. 86-736. The District has functionally owned the
land since its construction. Maine Avenue Southwest, another
boundary line, has also shifted. It no longer turns southerly
to follow the shoreline, but remains on an east to west course.
D.C. has since acquired
the land between the previous Maine Avenue Southwest route and
the present path, though that is not represented in current
statute. The District has also functionally owned this land
since its acquisition.
The District government now has new plans to revitalize the
Southwest Waterfront. In December 2008, the District entered
into a public-private partnership with Hoffman-Struever
Waterfront L.L.C. (now Hoffman-Madison Waterfront L.L.C.) to
develop the land.\1\ D.C. also passed legislation in 2008 to
provide $198 million in public financing for the project.\2\
The planned development would create approximately 3 million
square feet of mixed use facilities along the Washington
Channel.\3\ Once complete, the project is estimated to generate
$32 million in annual taxes for D.C. and bring 1,800 permanent
new jobs based on conservative estimates.\4\ The planning
behind this project is well underway and construction is
estimated to begin in the first quarter of 2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\``Southwest Waterfront Disposition Third Revised Emergency
Approval Resolution of 2008'' (D.C. Resolution 17-955).
\2\``Southwest Waterfront Bond Financing Act of 2008'' (DC Law 17-
252; DC Official Code Sec. 2-1217.131 through Sec. 2-1217.143).
\3\D.C. Zoning Commission Order No. 11-03; http://dcoz.dc.gov/
orders/11-03.pdf, p. 33.
\4\http://dcclims1.dccouncil.us/images/00001/20090807122433.pdf, p.
5.
\5\ http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/2011/02/dcs-sw-
waterfront-application-filed.html ?page=all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To facilitate this planned development, the District seeks
to clarify its ownership of the parcels in question. As
explained above, due to the changes in the boundary lines of
the Southwest Waterfront since the passage of P.L. 86-736 in
1960, a few parcels of land lack clear ownership in statute
even though they have always been used by the District and are
commonly understood to be part of its Southwest Waterfront
holdings.
Therefore, Section 1 of H.R. 2297 would change the legal
description of the area consistent with the description of the
Southwest Waterfront Project Site as filed with the District of
Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009, as Instrument
Number 2009116776. The bill would also permit D.C. to
relinquish all right, title and interest of the United States
of America (including any federal agency or department) in the
Southwest Waterfront as described by the Recorder of Deeds in
Instrument Number 2009116776. Section 1 of the bill also
removes certain provisions of the original transfer legislation
that are no longer applicable, and it replaces the outdated
``urban renewal plan'' with the term ``master plan.'' The bill
also allows D.C. to sell parts of the Southwest Waterfront,
which will allow the public-private partnership to sell the
relevant air rights related to certain planned condominium
developments.
Although the original transfer statute was incorporated as
part of the D.C. Code, the city is not free to amend it without
Congressional approval due to the restrictions in the original
legislation.
III. Legislative History
H.R. 2297 was introduced by D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes
Norton on June 22, 2011. Versions of this bill had been
introduced previously as parts of larger bills in the 111th
Congress. Both H.R. 4207, the 2009 District of Columbia Omnibus
Authorization Act, and H.R. 5103, the 2010 District of Columbia
Omnibus Authorization Act, contained sections with similar
intent and language to H.R. 2297. In addition, on June 16,
2010, Delegate Norton introduced a freestanding bill, H.R.
5544, that closely resembles H.R. 2297. It was referred to the
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office and the District
of Columbia, but did not advance.
This Congress, H.R. 2297 was also referred to the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The Committee
subsequently referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Health
Care, District of Columbia, Census and the National Archives.
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee discharged the bill and
the full House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
adopted H.R. 2297 by voice vote with a substitute amendment
offered by Delegate Norton. The amendment added Section 3 to
the bill and made technical corrections. On December 6, 2011,
H.R. 2297 as amended by the Committee passed the House of
Representatives under suspension of the rules.
On December 7, 2011, H.R. 2297 was referred to the Senate
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The
Committee considered the bill on December 14, 2011, and ordered
the bill favorably reported to the full Senate by voice vote.
The Senators present were Senators Lieberman, Levin, Akaka,
Begich, Collins, Coburn, Brown, Johnson and Portman.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1: Promoting development of the Southwest Waterfront
Subsection (a) of Section 1 would update the description of
the property by striking part of D.C. Code Section 6-321.01 and
inserting language to define the Southwest Waterfront as
described in Instrument Number 2009116776 as filed with the
District of Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009.
Subsection (b) of Section 1 would also amend D.C. Code
Section 6-321.01 and transfer the land by one or more quitclaim
deed, ensuring that all parcels--including those that did not
exist at the time of the original transfer legislation--are
clearly transferred to the District of Columbia.
Subsection (c) of Section 1 updates D.C. Code Section 6-
321.02 to reference a ``master plan'' instead of an urban
renewal plan for the Southwest Waterfront that has expired.
Subsection (d) of Section 1 would expand permissible
disposition and uses of the property and strikes the existing
D.C. Code Section 6-321.04, which contains provisions from the
expired urban renewal plan.
Subsection (e) of Section 1 would strike D.C. Code Section
6-321.05 which contains provisions from the previous Urban
Renewal Plan.
Subsection (f) of Section 1 would update Section 6-321.08
of the D.C. Code, to clarify that the District of Columbia is
the successor in interest to the abolished District of Columbia
Redevelopment Land Agency.
Section 2: Clarification of permitted activities at Municipal Fish
Market
This section amends Section 37-205.01 of the D.C. Code to
allow the Mayor to determine the appropriate uses for the
Municipal Fish Market.
Section 3: Maine Lobsterman Memorial
This section prohibits the removal, destruction or
obstruction of the Maine Lobsterman Memorial, but does allow
the memorial to be moved to another location on the Southwest
Waterfront if that location meets certain criteria.
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact
Pursuant to the requirement of paragraph 11(b)(1) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and has
determined that the bill would have no regulatory impact.
Moreover, CBO states that the bill contains no
intergovernmental or private sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on
state, local, or tribal governments.
VI. Estimated Cost of Legislation
December 20, 2011.
Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2297, an act to
promote the development of the Southwest waterfront in the
District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
Pickford.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf.
Enclosure.
H.R. 2297--An act to promote the development of the Southwest
waterfront in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes
H.R. 2297 would amend the District of Columbia Official
Code to transfer all federal right, title, and interest in the
Southwest waterfront area to the District of Columbia. The
legislation would authorize the District of Columbia to lease
or sell the site, expand the District's authority to manage the
Maine Avenue Fish Market, and allow the Maine Lobsterman
Memorial to be moved to another location.
Information from the National Park Service and the National
Capital Planning Commission indicates that the property that
would be transferred is not being used by the federal
government, and no income is generated from it under current
law. Thus, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2297 would have
no significant effect on the federal budget. Enacting the
legislation would not affect revenues or direct spending;
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
H.R. 2297 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
On November 17, 2011, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for
H.R. 2297 as ordered reported by the House Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform on November 3, 2011. The two
versions of the legislation are identical, and the CBO cost
estimates are the same.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew
Pickford. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the following changes in existing
law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows:
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE
DIVISION I--GOVERNMENT OF DISTRICT
TITLE 6--HOUSING AND BUILDING RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 3--HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT
Subchapter III--Transfer to Agency of Certain Property Near Maine
Avenue
Sec. 6-321.01.
Subject to the provisions of Sec. Sec. 6-301.20, 6-311.01,
and this subchapter, the Council of the District of Columbia is
authorized on behalf of the United States to transfer by one or
more quitclaim deeds to the District of Columbia Redevelopment
Land Agency established by Sec. 6-301.03, all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to part or all of certain
property in the said District, as follows: [The area bounded by
the east line of 14th Street Southwest, the existing southerly
(or westerly) building line of Maine Avenue Southwest, the
northerly line of Fort Lesley J. McNair at P Street Southwest,
and the bulkhead line established pursuant to the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899 (30 Stat. 1151), as amended, together with
any land area extending channelward from said bulkhead line.]
The property located within the bounds of the legal description
of which is the Southwest Waterfront Project Site (dated
October 8, 2009) under Exhibit A of the document titled
``Intent to Clarify the Legal Description in Furtherance of
Land Disposition Agreement'', as filed with the District of
Columbia Recorder of Deeds on October 27, 2009 as Instrument
Number 2009116776.
Sec. 6-321.02.
The Council of the District of Columbia shall, prior to
transferring to the Agency right, title, and interest in and to
any of the said property described in Sec. 6-321.01, determine
whether such property is necessary to the redevelopment of the
southwest section of the District of Columbia in accordance
with [an urban renewal plan] a master plan approved by it, and,
if it so finds, it shall, acting on behalf of the United
States, transfer and donate to the Agency all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to so much of said
property as it determines is necessary to carry out such master
plan[ such urban renewal plan].
Sec. 6-321.03.
[Subject to the provisions of Sec. 6-321.05,] The Council
of the District of Columbia shall, at the time of transferring
to the Agency right, title, and interest in and to any of the
property described in Sec. 6-321.01, also transfer to the
Agency the Mayor's jurisdiction as provided by Sec. 10-501.01
over so much of the said property as may be so transferred.
Sec. 6-321.04.
[(a)] The Agency is hereby authorized, in accordance with
[subchapter I of Chapter 1 of this title, to lease to a
redevelopment company or other lessee] the District of Columbia
Redevelopment Act of 1945 and section 1, to lease or sell to a
redevelopment company or other lessee or purchaser such real
property as may be transferred to the Agency under the
authority of this Act. [subchapter but may not otherwise
dispose of such property except to the United States or any
department or agency thereof, or to the District of Columbia,
in accordance with Sec. 6-321.05. In the event that real
property acquired by the Agency from the United States pursuant
to this subchapter is transferred to the District of Columbia
or to any department or agency of the United States pursuant to
this section, such transfer shall be without reimbursement or
transfer of funds.]
[(b) In connection with the leasing of the real property
transferred to the Agency under the authority of this
subchapter, together with the leasing of any real property
lying between such real property so transferred and the
southerly or westerly line of Maine Avenue as the same may be
relocated in connection with carrying out an urban renewal
plan, the Agency is authorized and directed to provide to the
owner or owners of any business concern displaced from the area
described in Sec. 6-321.01, a priority of opportunity to lease,
either individually or as a redevelopment company solely owned
by the owner or owners of 1 or more such business concerns, so
much of such real property lying channelward of the southerly
or westerly line of Maine Avenue as so relocated, at a rental
based on the use-value of the real property so leased
determined in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 6-301.09,
and Sec. 1460(c)(4) of Title 42, United States Code, as may be
required for the construction of commercial facilities at least
substantially equal to the facilities from which such business
concern was so displaced. The priority of opportunity created
by this section is a personal right of the owners of businesses
displaced. In the event of the death of any such owner of any
such displaced business, the spouse of such owner, or, if there
is no spouse, the children of such owner shall be entitled to
exercise the priority of such owner in accordance with the
provisions of this section, but in no event shall any such
priority be otherwise transferable; provided, however, that the
spouse or the children, as the case may be, shall have no
greater priority than the priority holder would have had if
living. For the purposes of exercising such priority, the
spouse or children, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be
owner of such business concern so displaced. When the real
property affected by the provisions of this subsection becomes
available for leasing by the Agency, the Agency shall notify,
in writing, the owners of the business concerns displaced, as
to the availability of such real property for leasing to such
owners in accordance with the provisions of this subsection.
The Agency shall give such owners so notified a period of 180
days to notify the Agency, in writing, of their intention to
proceed in accordance with the general development plan of the
Agency for the area lying channelward of Maine Avenue, as so
relocated, and to demonstrate to the Agency their ability to
carry out so much of such plan as may be embraced within the
area which they desire to lease. If at the end of such period
of 180 days, such owners have failed to make a demonstration to
that effect which is satisfactory to the Agency, the priority
of opportunity provided by this subsection shall no longer
continue to be available to such owners, except that if after
the end of such 180-day period the Agency shall change the
terms under which real property is to be leased, or the
redevelopment plan for the area described in Sec. 6-321.01 is
changed so as to affect the economic value of the leasehold,
the Agency shall in writing notify each such owner of the
change or changes so made and give to such owner so notified a
period of 60 days within which to advise the Agency in writing
of his intention and to demonstrate his ability to proceed as
aforesaid.
[(c)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
whenever, pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, the
Agency offers leaseholds to persons entitled to a priority of
opportunity to lease under the provisions of this section, the
annual rent prescribed in such lease shall not exceed an amount
which is the greater of:
[(A) An amount equal to 6% of the residual value of
the land for the prescribed use to which any owner of a
displaced business concern shall put such land under
such lease;
[(B) The annual amount which the Agency shall be
required to pay in principal and interest on a 40-year
loan of an amount equal to the residual value of the
land under such lease which value is the residual value
of the land which was determined by the Agency, in
accordance with this subsection, and on the basis of
which such land was initially leased under this
section; or
[(C) The sum of: (i) the amount determined under
subparagraph (A) or (B) of this paragraph, whichever is
greater; and (ii) 50% of the product of the occupancy
cost factor for the class and character of the business
of such lessee times the amount by which the lessee's
actual annual gross sales income exceeds the estimated
gross sales income (for the class and character of the
displaced business) used by the Agency in determining
the residual value of the land leased to such lessee.
[(2) In the case of any land which the Agency leases under
this section, the annual rent prescribed by the Agency in the
lease of such land shall not, during the 43-year period
beginning on the date such land was first leased by the Agency
under this section, be less than the amount determined under
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of this subsection. In the
case of any land which the Agency leases under this section to
a displaced business, the residual value of such land:
[(A) May be redetermined by the Agency after the
expiration of 25 years from the date such land was
first leased by the Agency and at the end of each 10-
year period thereafter; or
[(B) Shall be redetermined by the Agency if at the
end of the 25-year period from the date such land was
first leased by the Agency or at the end of each 10-
year period thereafter, the lessee requests the Agency
to redetermine such residual value.
[(3) The residual value of such land shall make due
allowance for the cost to the owner of the displaced business
of all improvements and public charges on such land, and shall
not exceed the maximum fair use value economically feasible to
permit the reestablishment of a business of the class and
character of such displaced business.
[(4) Each business holding a lease under this subchapter
shall furnish annually to the Agency (on such date as the
Agency may by regulation prescribe) a copy of the sales tax
return filed by such business under the District of Columbia
Sales Tax Act, which copy was furnished to the business under
Sec. 47-2018(a).
[Sec. 6-321.05.
[Notwithstanding Sec. Sec. 6-321.01 to 6-321.04, if any of
the real property transferred to the Agency under the authority
of this subchapter is not leased by the Agency in accordance
with an urban renewal plan approved by the Council of the
District of Columbia or otherwise disposed of, on or before the
date the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development makes the
final federal capital grant payment to the Agency for the
project pursuant to title I of the Housing Act of 1949, as
amended, then the right, title, and interest in and to so much
of the said real property as is not so leased or otherwise
disposed of by such date shall revert to the United States,
subject to the exclusive control and jurisdiction of the Mayor
of the District of Columbia, and subject to the provisions of
Sec. Sec. 10-111 and 10-112.]
Sec. 6-321.06.
Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed as
requiring the said Council of the District of Columbia to
transfer the right, title, and interest in and to so much of
the property described in Sec. 6-321.01 as the Council may
determine, in its discretion, is required for municipal
purposes or is to continue to be owned by the United States
under the jurisdiction of the Mayor, for the benefit of the
District of Columbia.
Sec. 6-321.07.
No transfer or donation of any interest in real property
under the authority of this subchapter shall constitute a local
grant-in-aid in connection with any urban renewal project being
undertaken with federal assistance under title I of the Housing
Act of 1949, as amended.
Sec. 6-321.08.
As used in this subchapter, any reference to the ``Agency''
shall be deemed to be the District of Columbia as the successor
interest to the Agency. [the terms ``Agency,'' ``lessee,''
``real property,'' ``redevelopment,'' and ``redevelopment
company'' shall have the respective meanings provided for such
terms by Sec. 6-301.02.]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CODE
DIVISION V--LOCAL BUSINESS AFFAIRS
TITLE 37--WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND MARKETS
CHAPTER 2--WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND MARKETS GENERALLY
Subchapter III--Markets Generally
Section 37-205.01.
The Mayor of the District of Columbia is authorized and
directed in the name of the District of Columbia to exclusively
control, regulate, and [operate as a municipal fish wharf and
market] operate as a market and for such other uses as the
Mayor determines to be appropriate, the water frontage on the
Potomac River lying south of Water Street, between 11th and
12th Streets, including the buildings and wharves thereon[, and
said wharf shall constitute the sole wharf for the landing of
fish and oysters for sale in the District of Columbia]; and
said Mayor shall have power to make leases, fix and determine
rentals, wharfage and dockage fees, and to collect and pay the
same into the treasury of the United States to the credit of
the General Fund of the District of Columbia; and said Mayor to
make and amend, from time to time, all such regulations as it
may deem proper for the control, regulation, and [operation of
said municipal fish wharf and market] operation of said market.