Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The tax revenue argument is nonsense, and ignores the tremendous economic impact that not-for-profit entities (which generally are not taxpaying) have in DC. Indeed without such institutions, DC would have a far flatter economy that it has today. Look, I get that there are some externalities and negative effects of larger institutions like private schools on surrounding neighborhoods, and those issues (traffic, parking, etc) can and should be managed through the zoning process, binding agreements and so forth. But independent schools also directly bring economic activity through taxpaying staff, vendors and others, and may positively impact real estate values (which then pay more in taxes). Their parents may bring their high incomes also, which then get taxed in DC rather than MD or VA> It's no secret, for example, that the presence of so many nearby independent schools creates a certain level of demand for Cleveland Park houses, as parents get tired of the daily drive (or twice daily drive) from Potomac, North Bethesda and Va. and move in to the area so that their kids can be closer to their schools. Georgetown Day's consolidation/expansion will contribute to this effect in the nearby area.

This is pure fantasy. Proximity to elite private schools has almost nothing to do with Cleveland Park desirability. Factor the incredible, historic housing stock with proximity to downtown and the metro as elements much more conducive than being close to the Cathedral, NCRC or Sidwell.

The tax factor is real. Had the mixed-use developments proposed by Martens and Safeway gone forward, there would have been millions of dollars per year coming into the District in the form of property taxes and income taxes. With the increased residential density would have come more support for interesting retail. Instead, much of the land will revert to a non-profit that is exempt from taxes, and the neighborhood will endure not one, not two, but three schools on the site. What is that, about 1000 kids?

Let's translate that. Right now, there are about 300 kids coming to the campus, so maybe 200-225 cars, plus faculty and staff. Put that at 3x with the prospects of closing 42nd Street. So how will all of those cars access the site, particularly given the peak period turn restrictions off River Road? That is not a welcoming amenity for the neighborhood.

The taxpaying staff, vendors and others are likely not DC residents. Sure a few of them might be, but most faculty and staff of these schools live in the suburbs.

It is also highly unlikely people will move closer to the neighborhood because they get tired of the commute. They will continue to their jobs in Tyson's and Rockville and have their Nannys continue to drive.

It takes logical contortions of epic proportions to consider this as a benefit to the neighborhood. It is rather funny that one of the staunchest NIMBYs in the neighborhood has already supported the proposal, but alas, her daughter is a GDS student - big surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If y'all in Tenleytown hate GDS so much, we folks south along Wisconsin will take them and their school and playing fields and send you in exchange the emerging two-block megaplex called "Cathedral Commons." Better a school than a mall.

I would make that trade with no give-backs.

[Anonymous]

+1 on the trade. In a heartbeat.

[Anonymous]

Cathedral Commons is LONG over due and will be awesome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cathedral Commons is LONG over due and will be awesome.

True, if one's definition of "awesome" is generic chain store dreck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cathedral Commons is LONG over due and will be awesome.

True, if one's definition of "awesome" is generic chain store dreck.

Welcome to life in the 21st Century - any retail concept worth operating is worth franchising.

[Anonymous]

Again, the neighborhood folks whining about GDS purchase and plans only have themselves to blame. They opposed Safeway's proposal - the Safeway folks probably knew how long the CPCA dug their heels in on the CP Giant and bet that taking GDS' money was the better bet. Ask the neighbors in Berkley, east of Foxhall between W and Reservoir. They could've had a mayor's mansion on a huge parcel of relatively undeveloped land, but now they have a new traffic light and 46 houses.

[Anonymous]

Most of the nearby neighbors were welcoming the Safeway plans to redevelop the site. Name one person who opposed it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the nearby neighbors were welcoming the Safeway plans to redevelop the site. Name one person who opposed it?

Most the neighbors in Cleveland Park supported or didn't care about the Giant development. It was a tiny minority of opponents that stopped it up for ten years. Neighborhoods don't vote on development, if they did the vast majority of projects would get built faster. How many neighbors oppose GDS? Not many. That won't stop them from making the school go through hell. The same thing would have happened with Safeway/Martins. Some people don't like change, some people get a kick out of slowing it down. IF GDS allows the Martins property to be commercial, I think there is a good compromise to be reached. If I were the neighborhood, I would extract what I could from the Martin's property in return for speedy approval for the Safeway property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, the neighborhood folks whining about GDS purchase and plans only have themselves to blame. They opposed Safeway's proposal - the Safeway folks probably knew how long the CPCA dug their heels in on the CP Giant and bet that taking GDS' money was the better bet. Ask the neighbors in Berkley, east of Foxhall between W and Reservoir. They could've had a mayor's mansion on a huge parcel of relatively undeveloped land, but now they have a new traffic light and 46 houses.

Your characterizing of the CP Giant history is completely wrong. In 1998-2000, Giant proposed to raze the old supermarket and build a new, large one. The local citizens association did oppose the design on the ground that it presented a black wall to Wisconsin Avenue roughly from Newark St. to Cactus Cantina. (Think of the Giant on Arlington Rd. which unfortunately presents a dead zone toward vibrant Bethesda Row, instead facingits interior parking lot.) In any event, Giant pulled its proposal because it was being acquired by Ahold and Ahold's focus soon turned to other matters, like an SEC investigation into its acquisitions. In 2002-2003, however, the ANC and various other local groups, together with the city, entered into an agreement with Giant where Giant would build a modern store, with entrances on Wisconsin Ave oriented to pedestrians and a design that the groups supported. Indeed, the ANC at its own expense hired an architect to work with Giant on a new pedestrian-focused design. Mayor Williams, in fact, issued a press release on how it was an example of a developer and the community working successfully together. However, Giant/Ahold later just walked away from the agreement.

By 2006, they were back, with a much larger, more ambitious plan that encompassed nearly two whole blocks. While there was concern about Giant's good faith in backing away from the earlier agreement, various community groups engaged with Giant and were pretty pleased with Giant's plan, which included relatively few entrances and exits for vehicles to mitigate traffic impact around 70 housing units and a building between Idaho and Newark around 3 stories in height that was set back to preserve light and views. Perhaps emboldened by the community's positive reaction to their 2006 plan, Giant then pulled this proposal also. When they came back, they had added more vehicle access points, thus creating new traffic patterns, doubled the proposed number of housing units and doubled the height and mass of the north building. While most development proposals start big and then are trimmed, Giant stated modestly and pretty thoughtfully but then got greedy. Neighborhood groups became concerned about traffic and parking impacts and the fact that Giant's project had grown so large that it even required changes to the zoning to allow it to go forward. By then Harriet Tregoning has taken over the Planning Office with her aggressive pro-development agenda, and her office's position swung from one of neutral planning analyst to cheerleader for the super-sized Cathedral Commons. There is other speculation that some pay to play was involved, but in any event the plans sailed through the zoning board with barely a window changed. Those who follow large development plans know how very unusual that is. Even the commission staff was surprised.

It is what it is, and the neighborhood will have to live with it. But it is a total canard to characterize the CP neighborhood position as one of digging in its heels. Several times the community engaged Giant to build a better store and a balanced proposal, reaching agreement only to have Giant change its mind, walk away in bad faith and then get greedy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, the neighborhood folks whining about GDS purchase and plans only have themselves to blame. They opposed Safeway's proposal - the Safeway folks probably knew how long the CPCA dug their heels in on the CP Giant and bet that taking GDS' money was the better bet. Ask the neighbors in Berkley, east of Foxhall between W and Reservoir. They could've had a mayor's mansion on a huge parcel of relatively undeveloped land, but now they have a new traffic light and 46 houses.

Your characterizing of the CP Giant history is completely wrong. In 1998-2000, Giant proposed to raze the old supermarket and build a new, large one. The local citizens association did oppose the design on the ground that it presented a black wall to Wisconsin Avenue roughly from Newark St. to Cactus Cantina. (Think of the Giant on Arlington Rd. which unfortunately presents a dead zone toward vibrant Bethesda Row, instead facingits interior parking lot.) In any event, Giant pulled its proposal because it was being acquired by Ahold and Ahold's focus soon turned to other matters, like an SEC investigation into its acquisitions. In 2002-2003, however, the ANC and various other local groups, together with the city, entered into an agreement with Giant where Giant would build a modern store, with entrances on Wisconsin Ave oriented to pedestrians and a design that the groups supported. Indeed, the ANC at its own expense hired an architect to work with Giant on a new pedestrian-focused design. Mayor Williams, in fact, issued a press release on how it was an example of a developer and the community working successfully together. However, Giant/Ahold later just walked away from the agreement.

By 2006, they were back, with a much larger, more ambitious plan that encompassed nearly two whole blocks. While there was concern about Giant's good faith in backing away from the earlier agreement, various community groups engaged with Giant and were pretty pleased with Giant's plan, which included relatively few entrances and exits for vehicles to mitigate traffic impact around 70 housing units and a building between Idaho and Newark around 3 stories in height that was set back to preserve light and views. Perhaps emboldened by the community's positive reaction to their 2006 plan, Giant then pulled this proposal also. When they came back, they had added more vehicle access points, thus creating new traffic patterns, doubled the proposed number of housing units and doubled the height and mass of the north building. While most development proposals start big and then are trimmed, Giant stated modestly and pretty thoughtfully but then got greedy. Neighborhood groups became concerned about traffic and parking impacts and the fact that Giant's project had grown so large that it even required changes to the zoning to allow it to go forward. By then Harriet Tregoning has taken over the Planning Office with her aggressive pro-development agenda, and her office's position swung from one of neutral planning analyst to cheerleader for the super-sized Cathedral Commons. There is other speculation that some pay to play was involved, but in any event the plans sailed through the zoning board with barely a window changed. Those who follow large development plans know how very unusual that is. Even the commission staff was surprised.

It is what it is, and the neighborhood will have to live with it. But it is a total canard to characterize the CP neighborhood position as one of digging in its heels. Several times the community engaged Giant to build a better store and a balanced proposal, reaching agreement only to have Giant change its mind, walk away in bad faith and then get greedy.

How does your view square with this? http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/2449/cpca-board-postpones-election-amid-campaign-for-change/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the nearby neighbors were welcoming the Safeway plans to redevelop the site. Name one person who opposed it?

Get over it - the same folks that raised cane about the billiards overhaul were the same ones bellyaching about the Safeway store/condo plan. Now that the store is slated to close, neighbors are up in arms. But when they believed they could beat back change and keep their sleepy Safeway (as opposed to the social or Soviet Safeway), they were all in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, the neighborhood folks whining about GDS purchase and plans only have themselves to blame. They opposed Safeway's proposal - the Safeway folks probably knew how long the CPCA dug their heels in on the CP Giant and bet that taking GDS' money was the better bet. Ask the neighbors in Berkley, east of Foxhall between W and Reservoir. They could've had a mayor's mansion on a huge parcel of relatively undeveloped land, but now they have a new traffic light and 46 houses.

Your characterizing of the CP Giant history is completely wrong. In 1998-2000, Giant proposed to raze the old supermarket and build a new, large one. The local citizens association did oppose the design on the ground that it presented a black wall to Wisconsin Avenue roughly from Newark St. to Cactus Cantina. (Think of the Giant on Arlington Rd. which unfortunately presents a dead zone toward vibrant Bethesda Row, instead facingits interior parking lot.) In any event, Giant pulled its proposal because it was being acquired by Ahold and Ahold's focus soon turned to other matters, like an SEC investigation into its acquisitions. In 2002-2003, however, the ANC and various other local groups, together with the city, entered into an agreement with Giant where Giant would build a modern store, with entrances on Wisconsin Ave oriented to pedestrians and a design that the groups supported. Indeed, the ANC at its own expense hired an architect to work with Giant on a new pedestrian-focused design. Mayor Williams, in fact, issued a press release on how it was an example of a developer and the community working successfully together. However, Giant/Ahold later just walked away from the agreement.

By 2006, they were back, with a much larger, more ambitious plan that encompassed nearly two whole blocks. While there was concern about Giant's good faith in backing away from the earlier agreement, various community groups engaged with Giant and were pretty pleased with Giant's plan, which included relatively few entrances and exits for vehicles to mitigate traffic impact around 70 housing units and a building between Idaho and Newark around 3 stories in height that was set back to preserve light and views. Perhaps emboldened by the community's positive reaction to their 2006 plan, Giant then pulled this proposal also. When they came back, they had added more vehicle access points, thus creating new traffic patterns, doubled the proposed number of housing units and doubled the height and mass of the north building. While most development proposals start big and then are trimmed, Giant stated modestly and pretty thoughtfully but then got greedy. Neighborhood groups became concerned about traffic and parking impacts and the fact that Giant's project had grown so large that it even required changes to the zoning to allow it to go forward. By then Harriet Tregoning has taken over the Planning Office with her aggressive pro-development agenda, and her office's position swung from one of neutral planning analyst to cheerleader for the super-sized Cathedral Commons. There is other speculation that some pay to play was involved, but in any event the plans sailed through the zoning board with barely a window changed. Those who follow large development plans know how very unusual that is. Even the commission staff was surprised.

It is what it is, and the neighborhood will have to live with it. But it is a total canard to characterize the CP neighborhood position as one of digging in its heels. Several times the community engaged Giant to build a better store and a balanced proposal, reaching agreement only to have Giant change its mind, walk away in bad faith and then get greedy.

How does your view square with this? http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/2449/cpca-board-postpones-election-amid-campaign-for-change/

First of all, consider the source: GGW is part of the so-called "smart growth" development lobby echo chamber. But what the piece describes is how the CPCA testified for changes in Giant's final proposal submitted to the zoning commission. CPCA had supported two prior designs (indeed it was a party to the 2003 agreement for Giant to build a new store and favored the 2006 design as well). A group called AWARE, in coordination with the developer group Ward 3 Vision, tried to take over CPCA because Giant was concerned that as a party to the 2003 agreement, CPCA might still have legal rights to enfore it. After a vocal campaign in which many new members joined CPCA, the Aware/pro-"smart growth" slate lost by a substantial margin, to a slate that favored more balanced, "intelligent" growth that respects Cleveland Park's historic village in the city character. Unfortunately by this time the zoning commission had already approved Cathedral Commons anyway.

[Anonymous]

Okay, so the CPCAesque folks of Tenleytown opposed the Safeway reno and now they've got an expanded private school instead.

[Anonymous]

To the person recounting the history of the Cleveland Park Giant, your are forgetting the original proposal in 1999 that was a 1 store with one story of small offices on the second floor. The openings on Wisconsin Avenue were perfect and the only problem, according to the neighbors, was the 3 story (1 1/2 underground) parking garage that required a zoning variance.

The neighbors (the tiny minority) threatened lawsuits, so instead, Giant proposed the proposal that had the blank wall. At that point the CPCA threatened to file a landmark designation (nice way to use preservation as a blunt instrument) and the rest of your account is accurate. However, there was an irony in that right before Giant broke ground on Cathedral Commons, one of the key opponents suggested on the neighborhood Yahoo group that Giant scale back the development to 2 stories on one side and three on the other. The original proposal was for one story and nothing new on the north parcel.

You get what you wish for, but none of this has anything to do with GDS.