MEMORANDUM

TO: District of Columbia Zoning Commission

FROM: Jennifer Steingasser, Deputy Director, Development Review & Historic Preservation

DATE: February 24, 2017

SUBJECT: ZC Case 05-28P: Final Report for Modifications to the First-Stage approval and
Second Stage PUD for Block J, filed by Parkside Residential LLC
________________________________________________________________________________

I. APPLICATION

At its public meeting of December 12, 2016, the Commission set down the subject application for a
second-stage PUD for a six-story multi-family as described below:

Table 1
First-Stage PUD Proposed Modification
Dwelling Units 140-160 196
Gross Floor Area 183,000 square feet 161,816 square feet
Lot Size 40,000 square feet 34,664 square feet
Lot Occupancy 63 percent 81.6 percent
Floor Area Ratio 4.58 4.7
Building Height 54 feet; 74 feet; 90 feet 64 feet, 8 inches; 74 feet; 81 feet, 4 inches
Off-Street Parking 96 85

The proposed second-stage application follows the first-stage approval of the PUD by the
Commission under Order 05-28 in that it approved a mid-rise apartment building on Block J.

II. SITE AND AREA DESCRIPTION

Block J is located on the east side of the Parkside PUD. The PUD site is 15.5 acres in size and
located in Ward 7 in the North East quadrant of the District. Block J is bound by Hayes Street to
the northeast, Parkside Place to the northwest, Kenilworth Terrace to the southeast and Cassell
Place to the southwest. It is proposed to be surrounded by a charter school to the northwest, mid-
rise apartments to the southwest, apartments to the northeast and a health center and a future post-
high school educational facility the southeast.

Location: Square 5056, Lot 811

Ward, ANC: Ward 7, ANC 7D

th
1100 4 Street, S.W., Suite E650 Washington, DC 20024 phone 202-442-7600, fax 202-442-7638
www.planning.dc.gov Find us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter @OPinDC
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 2 of 12

Applicant: Parkside Residential LLC, c/o City Interests, LLC

PUD-Related Zoning: R-5-A to C-3-A (ZR58)

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION – CHANGES SINCE SETDOWN

A complete discussion of the proposed development can be found in the OP Setdown Report dated
December 2, 2016 (ZC Case 05-28P, Exhibit 12). Since filing for setdown the applicant has revised
the application pursuant to comments from the Office of Planning and the Commission. A
summary of those comments can be found on pages 2 and 3 of this report.

IV. COMMISSION AND OFFICE OF PLANNING SETDOWN COMMENTS

On December 23, 2016, the applicant filed revised plans (exhibits 13C1 through 13C4) in response
to comments received at the Commission’s public meeting on December 12, 2016. A prehearing
statement was filed on December 23, 2016 (Exhibit 13). A summary of the Commission’s
comments with the applicant’s responses is listed below.

Commission/OP Comment Applicant’s Response OP Analysis

1. How many units at what
level of affordability are
there in Parkside?
Provide why IZ does
not kick-in with the
proposed modification,
or request IZ and PUD
relief.
The first-stage PUD requires
20% of the residential square
footage for households earning
up to 80% AMI and 20% of the
residential square footage for
households earning between 80
and 120% AMI. To date the
applicant has constructed 74%
at 60% AMI, 11% at 80 to
The subject application is in
conformance with the
provisions of the first-stage
approval. However, because
the applicant has requested
modifications to the first stage
approval, IZ is now applicable
to this application and relief
must be granted for the
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 3 of 12

120% AMI and 15% at market applicant to construct this

2. Need further
development of the
design, consistent with
what was approved
before. Submit
additional contextual
drawings.
3. Not supportive of
corrugated metal siding.
Refine the colors of the
façade materials.
4. Submit a traffic study.
5. Add foundation
plantings
6. Provide a LEED-ND
checklist.
rate.
Additional contextual drawings
are shown on sheets A2.1-2.4
and 5.1-5.4 (exhibits 27C1-27-
C10). Colors and materials
were chosen to reflect existing
buildings surrounding the site.
The applicant proposes to bring
materials samples, including
corrugated metal siding, to the
hearing to better demonstrate
use of materials and better
reflect the colors proposed.
A Comprehensive
Transportation Review (CTR),
dated January 24, 2017 was
submitted to the file.
The applicant added foundation
plantings, including trees,
shrubbery and ornamental
grasses (sheets A2.1-2.4 and
5.1-5.7 (exhibits 27C1-27-
C10).
The applicant submitted a
LEED v4-Mid-Rise checklist
achieving LEED Silver.
building as 100% market rate.
The applicant submitted
contextual drawings depicting
how the proposed façade would
reflect existing buildings
surrounding the site.
The applicant proposes to bring
samples of the corrugated metal
siding to the hearing and
present why this material is
appropriate.
The CTR concludes that the
proposed building would not
have a detrimental effect on the
surrounding transportation
system.
Street trees are proposed
around the site and foundation
plantings added where space
permits, softening the
appearance of and adding a
residential feel to the building.
A LEED checklist for Silver
v4, dated February 14, 2017,
was submitted at the suggestion
of DOEE (Exhibit 27C12).

V. ZONING AND FLEXIBILITY

Requested Modifications:

a. Building Height
The first-stage PUD provided building heights meant to relate to adjacent development, stepping
down from ninety feet on the south to 54 feet on the north. Instead, the proposed building
would have a maximum height of eighty-one feet, four inches on the south, stepping down to 64
feet, eight inches on the east, similar to the building approved and constructed on Block E (ZC
Case No. 05-28J/K).

b. Parking
Parking for the subject building was approved in the first-stage PUD to be combined with the
parking for the building on Block E, with all of the parking for the two building sites to be
provided on the subject parcel only. The second-stage approval for Block E (ZC Case No. 05-
28 J/K) included a modification to provide the parking for Block E within that building. As it is
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 4 of 12

no longer necessary for the subject property to satisfy the off-street parking requirements for
Block E, the decrease in the number of parking spaces proposed reflects the need to provide
parking for the subject property only.

c. Block
The lot area of Block J was listed as 40,000 square feet in the first-stage PUD, and FAR and
gross floor area were calculated based on that number. In actuality the square footage of the
block is only 34,664 square feet, because the public space had been included in the earlier lot
area. As a result the FAR has increased, as shown in Table 1, page 1, although the building
square footage has increased only marginally. The increase in the number of units reflects a
change in market demand for smaller units.

Requested Flexibility:

a. Loading
One loading berth fifty-five feet in depth, one loading platform two hundred feet deep and one
service/delivery space twenty feet deep are required. Provision of a loading dock would require
either a large portion of the ground floor to be dedicated to loading or require trucks to back out
into a public street. The applicant is proposing instead a loading area in Cassell Street, subject
to the six requirements contained within the Comprehensive Transportation Review dated
January 24, 2017 (see Section XII, Recommendation, page 12). Provided the applicant
conforms to those requirements OP has no objection to this request for flexibility subject to
DDOT’s approval.

b. Side Yard
A side yard is not required, but if provided, a minimum of two inches for each foot of building
height, or 15 feet for the proposed building is required. The subject building is not proposed to
be built to the lot lines along either Cassell Place or Hayes Street, resulting in a side yard of ten
inches from Cassell Place and one-foot, ten inches along Hayes Street. As the proposed
structure would be the only structure on the block, provision of side yards is not necessary.
Therefore, OP supports this request for flexibility.

c. Parking
Subtitle C Section 710.2 requires above-grade garage parking to be set back a minimum of
twenty feet from a lot line that abuts a public street. Eleven of the proposed parking spaces
would not conform to this provision. This provision is intended to ensure that above-grade
parking would not deaden the street. In this case pedestrian access to the building would be
provided along two frontages, with the lobby facing out onto Kenilworth Terrace and Cassell
Place and the courtyard opening onto Parkside Place. Plantings of shrubs and ground covers
would soften the base and provide a residential feel to the building, with first-floor residential
windows on all four sides of the building. Therefore, OP has no objection to this request for
flexibility.

d. Penthouse
Relief is requested to permit three separate roof structures to accommodate the elevator override
and screening around mechanical equipment. These roof structures would all be set back a
minimum of one-to-one and be no more than five feet in height. Consolidation of these
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 5 of 12

structures would result in one larger more visible roof structure. Therefore, OP supports this
request flexibility.

e. Affordable Housing
The first-stage PUD for Parkside was approved with an affordable housing requirement for the
development as a whole, and not for each building, as is now required pursuant to the
Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) Regulations. Although this building is not otherwise subject to the IZ
regulations, the request for modification to the first-stage approval results in this site becoming
subject to those regulations. As the first-stage PUD requires the applicant to reserve 20% of the
residential square footage for households earning up to 80% AMI and an additional 20% for
households earning between 80 and 120% AMI, OP has no objection to this request. The
comprehensive affordable housing program for Parkside as a whole was established at the first-
stage and predates IZ and the 80% AMI level reflects the IZ standards for rental and owner units
prior to the recent changes through case ZC 04-33G and the ownership level as amended in case
ZC 04-33G.

f. Various Flexibility
The applicant requests flexibility to the following:
 Vary the location and design of all interior components,
 Vary the number of units by up to ten percent,
 Vary the final selection of exterior materials based on availability,
 Vary landscaping materials based on availability and sustainability,
 Vary streetscape design and materials based on Public Space Committee requirements,
 Make minor modifications to exterior components of the building, and to
 Vary the building sign over the canopy entrance in conformance with the signage
regulations.

OP recommends these flexibilities be substantially limited or refined. When considered in total

these flexibilities could result in a project that looks substantially different from the one in the
public record and considered by the Commission.

VI. SECOND-STAGE REVIEW CONDITIONS

The Zoning Commission approved a PUD-related map amendment for the subject application, from
R-5-A to C-3-A, subject to fifteen conditions, some of which are relevant to this site. Listed below
are the relevant conditions and a review of how the subject application conforms to them.

1. The Applicant shall submit, with the application for second-stage approval of the
PUD, an application for rezoning the PUD site from R-5-A and C-2-B to C-3-A and
CR that specifies the proposed rezoning by square and lot.

The subject application includes a request to amend the zoning of Square 5056, Lot
811 from R-5-A to C-3-A, as approved under the first-stage PUD.

2. The first-stage PUD is approved in accordance with the plans and materials
submitted by the Applicant marked as Exhibits 2, 21, and 52 of the record, as
modified by the guidelines, conditions, and standards of this Order.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 6 of 12

The first-stage PUD included an approval for a multi-family building for Block J.
The applicant is now requesting second-stage approval for that building, but with
modifications, including an increase in building height, number of dwelling units,
floor area ratio and lot occupancy, and decrease in gross floor area and number of
off-street parking.

3. The second-stage design of the PUD shall be based on further development and
refinement of the plans marked as Exhibits 2, 21, and 52 of the record, as modified
by the guidelines, conditions, and standards of this Order and shall include all
public benefits described in Findings of Fact 32 through 34.

The application provides the further development and refinement of the design,
necessary for second-stage review. It also includes a listing and description of the
public benefits and amenities proposed as a part of this application for the subject
property and the PUD as a whole.

4. In accordance with the plans and materials noted above, the approved PUD shall
consist of approximately 1,500–2,000 dwelling units, 500,000–750,000 square feet of
office space, 30,000–50,000 square feet of retail, with approximately 2,400 total
parking spaces. The entire project will include approximately 3,003,000 square feet
of gross floor area resulting in an overall density of approximately 4.44 FAR. The
total lot occupancy of the PUD will be approximately 62.4 percent. The maximum
height of the PUD will be 110 feet, which will be reserved solely for the buildings
located in the center portion of Parcel 12 fronting Kenilworth Avenue. The heights
for the remaining buildings shall not exceed 90 feet and must scale down to lesser
heights around the existing townhomes, as depicted in the Applicant’s plans.

The subject application is generally consistent with the use and general layout
proposed for the site. However, the applicant proposes to modify the building
height, and increase the number of dwelling units, lot occupancy and floor area ratio,
and decrease the gross floor area and off-street parking for Block J only, through a
requested a modification to the first-stage approval.

6. The PUD will reserve 20 percent of the total residential component as units
affordable to households having an income not exceeding 80 percent of Area Median
Income for the Washington, DC Metropolitan Statistical Area (adjusted for family
size). Those reserved as affordable rental units will remain affordable for at least 30
years; the affordability restriction for the affordable for-sale housing shall be
consistent with the terms required by the public subsidy the homebuyer uses to
provide gap financing.1

The application proposes the subject building to be 100 percent market rate.
Pursuant to the first stage approval 20 percent of the housing within Parkside would
be affordable at 80 percent AMI and 20 percent would be workforce housing
affordable at between 80 and 120 percent AMI. To date 74 percent of the housing
constructed at Parkside is affordable at 60 percent AMI, 11 percent at 80 to 120
percent AMI and 58 units at market rate. However, as the applicant has requested a
1
The first-stage PUD predates the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 7 of 12

modification to the first stage approval for the subject application, the IZ regulations
are now apply to this site. The applicant has requested flexibility to this requirement
as a part of this application.

8. The Applicant shall submit, as part of the second-stage application, landscape plans,
detailed architectural plans, and elevations indicating the design treatment of each
building.

The subject second-stage application includes detailed architectural plans, elevations

and landscape plans indicating the design of the proposed building (exhibits 27C1
through 27C12).

9. The Applicant shall submit, as part of a second-stage application, an analysis of the

potential for providing access to the PUD Site from Benning Road.

An analysis on the potential for providing access to the PUD site from Benning Road
was submitted as a part of the first second-stage application, ZC 05-28A, when this
access was deemed not feasible by the Commission.

10. The Applicant shall submit, as part of a Second Stage application, a detailed traffic
study that will (a) address the adequacy of pedestrian and vehicular access to the
PUD Site, including an analysis of the DDOT recommendation with respect to
access; (b) address traffic conditions pertaining Kenilworth Avenue, particularly in
light of the transportation initiatives identified by DDOT as planned or underway in
the vicinity, such as the Kenilworth Avenue Corridor study; and (c) analyze the
traffic impacts of the PUD in light of other new developments and uses in the
vicinity, such as the Cesar Chavez Public Charter School.

A Comprehensive Transportation Review, dated January 24, 2017 was submitted as

a part of this second-stage application. It concludes that the proposed development
would not result in detrimental impacts to the transportation system, provided all
planned site design elements and mitigation measures are implemented.

13. The first-stage approval is valid for a period of one year, within which time a
second-stage application shall be filed. If the second-stage application is for less
than the entire development described in this Order, no subsequent second-stage
application may be filed after three (3) years from date of approval of the partial
second-stage. It is within the Zoning Commission’s discretion to extend these
periods.

ZC Order 05-28O extended the first-stage PUD until October 3, 2017, within which
time any outstanding second-stage PUD applications must be filed. The subject
application was filed on September 30, 2016, prior to the expiration of the first-stage
PUD.

14. Given the size of the PUD, the Applicant may file the second-stage application in
phases for one or more of the buildings.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 8 of 12

The applicant has opted to file the second-stage applications in phases. The subject
application is for a multi-family building on Block J.

VII. PUD EVALUATION STANDARDS

The objectives of a PUD are to permit flexibility of development in return for the provision of
superior public benefits, provided the PUD process is not used to circumvent the intent and
purposes of the Zoning Regulations or result in an action inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The overall PUD has been determined to be consistent with the objectives and evaluation standards
of a Planned Unit Development, as defined in 11 DCMR § 2400.

Second-stage PUD applications are reviewed for consistency with the first-stage PUD approval, the
PUD process and the intent and purpose of the Zoning Regulations. The Commission, in approving
the application, may attach conditions, guidelines and standards in support of its decision, as
described in § 2408.6 of the Zoning Regulations.

VIII. PUBLIC BENEFITS AND AMENITIES

Public benefits are defined in § 2403.5 as “superior features… that benefit the surrounding
neighborhood or the public in general to a significantly greater extent than would likely result from
development of the site under… matter of right…” Amenities are defined under § 2403.7 as
including “one type of public benefit, specifically a functional or aesthetic feature of the proposed
development that adds to the attractiveness, convenience or comfort of the project for occupants
and immediate neighbors.”

The applicant proposes the following benefits and amenities for this second-stage PUD:

 Special Value for the Neighborhood: The application proposes the provision of new housing
that would transition from the mixed uses across Kenilworth Terrace to the mid-rise
apartments on the west side of Kenilworth Terrace, on a long vacant site.

 Certified Benefits Agreement: The applicant commits to a good faith effort, as requested by
ANC 7D, to hire 20 percent of its workforce for the construction of the project from Ward 7.

 Pedestrian Bridge: As part of the first-stage approval, the applicant committed to providing
twenty-five percent of the cost, not to exceed three million dollars, toward the construction
of the pedestrian bridge to provide improved access to the Minnesota Avenue Metrorail
station and neighborhoods located to the east of Kenilworth Avenue. DDOT is excepted to
issue a schedule in April regarding the advertisement for construction.

IX. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

As fully discussed in the OP setdown report dated December 2, 2016 (Exhibit 12), the application
would further major policies from various elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Land
Use, Housing, Environmental Protection, Urban Design elements and the Far Northeast and
Southeast Area Element. Since approval of the first-stage PUD the City Council adopted the 2006
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 9 of 12

Comprehensive Plan and the 2010 amendments. The overall PUD was found to be not inconsistent
with the 2006 Plan or the 2010 amendments.

Generalized Policy Map Future Land Use Map

The Future Land Use Map recommends the Medium Density Residential land use for the subject
property, defined as “neighborhoods or areas where mid-rise (4-7 stories) apartment buildings are
the predominant use.”

The Generalized Policy Map depicts the site as within the “Neighborhood Enhancement Areas”
designation. “The guiding philosophy in Neighborhood Enhancement Areas is to ensure that new
development “fits in” and responds to the existing character, natural features, and existing
/planned infrastructure capacity. New housing should be encouraged to improve the neighborhood
and must be consistent with the land use designation on the Future Land Use Map.”
The proposal is not inconsistent with the land use designation on the Future Land Use Map or the
depictions on the Generalized Policy Map. It would provide for a six-story apartment building
consistent with the existing character of the surrounding area and the land use designation on the
Future Land Use Map.

The proposal to provide a multi-family building on the site would further the following Land Use,
Transportation, Housing, Environmental Protection, Urban Design elements and the Far Northeast
and southeast Area Element policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
The subject application would provide new multi-family housing within the Parkside neighborhood.
Currently a vacant lot, the site would be developed with an apartment building intended to provide
some step-down in height from the planned high-rise apartment buildings on Kenilworth Terrace to
the lower density housing across from the site on Parkside Place. The façade of the building would
be a mixture of materials and colors, mixing and contrasting with surrounding development.
The green roofs above the below-grade garage and on the roof would lessen stormwater runoff
impacts and street trees around the site would be preserved or replaced as necessary. Foundation
plantings around two sides of the perimeter of the structure would soften the appearance of the
building along those facades and the vegetative roof would reduce the heat island effect and
stormwater runoff from the building.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 10 of 12

X. AGENCY REFERRALS

On January 26, 2017 OP notified the following agencies of the scheduling of an inter-agency
meeting to be held February 9, 2017 to discuss potential impacts of the proposed development on
the provision of their services:

 Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA);

 Department of Employment Services (DOES);
 Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE);
 Department of Health (DOH);
 Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD);
 Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR);
 District of Columbia Office on Aging (DCOA);
 District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS);
 District Department of Transportation (DDOT);
 Fire and Emergency Medical Services (FEMS);
 Metropolitan Police Department (MPD);
 DC Water (DCWater); and
 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA).

A reminder of the meeting was emailed to those same agencies on February 3, 2017.

The following agencies were in attendance at the inter-agency meeting: DOEE, DDOT, DHCD,
DCWATER and OP, including the OP Public Space Coordinator.

Comments were received from the following agencies, as described below.

 DDOT: The Urban Forestry Administration indicated a 32-inch cherry tree, a special tree,
would need to be relocated. A plan must be submitted detailing who would do the relocating
and the after-care, keeping the tree alive for at least three years. A plan for pre-, during and
post-care of street trees to remain is required, keeping those trees alive for a minimum of
three years, but preferably for five. Silt fences must be installed properly.

 DCWATER: The water main in front of the property under Kenilworth Terrace must be
replaced, whether or not the applicant connects to it.

 DOEE: Building should be designed to at least LEED Silver, version 4. Solar panels should
be added to the roof above the condensers, as street water should be diverted to the extent
possible. All bio-retention areas would be privately maintained.

 DHCD: In an email dated February 9, 2017, DHCD indicated that it has “no comments or
concerns regarding the modifications to the first stage approval and second stage PUD
development. They appear to be providing a sufficient number of affordable units for the
entire project…”

 Public Space Committee (OP): Proposed loading access from Cassell Place will need Public
Space Committee approval.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 11 of 12

No other comments were received.

XI. COMMUNITY COMMENTS

The applicant informed OP that ANC 7D voted not to support the application at its regularly
scheduled meeting of February 22, 2017.

No other comments were received.

XII. RECOMMENDATION

The Office Planning is supportive of the addition of a one-hundred percent affordable building
within Parkside. Colors of the building would reflect existing surrounding development, with the
use of a deep red color as an accent to contract with the tan and beige used over much of the facade.
The red serves to make certain features and aspects of the building stand out, marking the top or
corners of the building. Placement of the first floor approximately one-half flight up would provide
a sense of privacy to the residents of the first floor while allowing for a more prominent entrance
atop a flight of stairs.

The Office of Planning recommends approval of the requested modifications, some of which result
from the difference in the area of Block J as noted in the first-stage approval versus the actual
square footage of the lot and the use of the term “block occupancy” in place of “lot occupancy” in
the order for the first-stage approval. OP supports the modification to permit the reduction in
parking, as it is no longer required to be shared with the apartment building on Block E (ZC Case
No. 05-28J/K). Although the applicant revised the heights of the building, it is still designed to step
down from Kenilworth Terrace to Parkside Place. It is also designed in the shape of a “c” as
approved under the first stage, allowing for the provision of west-facing private landscaped open
space for the building’s residents.

OP recommends approval of the requested flexibility to loading, location of parking spaces,

compact car parking, reduced side yards and inclusionary zoning.

OP recommends the Various Flexibilities (V. f. above) be substantially limited or refined.

The application is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would further many of its
policies. Therefore, the Office of Planning recommends that the Commission APPROVE the
subject application subject to the Various Flexibilities (V. f. above) being substantially limited or
refined and subject to the following conditions to which that the applicant has agreed.

1. A TDM coordinator responsible for organizing and marketing the TDM plan and will act as
a point of contact with DDOT shall be designated.
2. All parking on site shall, at a minimum, be priced at market rates, defined as the average
cost for parking within a quarter mile radius of the site.
3. The cost of residential parking shall be unbundled from the lease or purchase price of each
unit.
ZC Case 05-28P, Parkside, Second Stage PUD, Block J
February 24, 2017 page 12 of 12

4. Bicycle parking provided shall exceed the minimums required by the Zoning Regulations,
including secure on-site and short-term spaces around the periphery of the property.
5. TDM materials shall be provided to new residents in the Residential Welcome Package.
6. A Transportation Information Center Display (electronic screen) shall be installed within the
residential lobby containing information related to local transportation alternatives.
7. The applicant prepares a loading management plan consistent with the recommendations on
page 12 of the Comprehensive Transportation Review dated January 24, 2017.
8. The applicant work with the Urban Forestry Administration on the relocation and care of the
special tree currently on the subject property.

JS/sjmAICP
Case Manager: Stephen J. Mordfin, AICP