Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

This is the same guy who was accusing a local activist on the Tenleytown listserv of being cowardly for posting anonymously on this thread. He'll respond here that he's actually a woman who's never heard of Ward Three Vision. He told the ANC that they were unreasonable for asking for more affordable housing for "free," without asking the developer to build an even bigger building!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post ever can cover this controversy?

Perhaps it's not a controversy at all. Did you see the LTE in the Current? Sounds like everyone I know: frustrated that a generally good plan is being nitpicked, while the ANC grandstands and ignores constituents requests for better amenities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post ever can cover this controversy?

Perhaps it's not a controversy at all. Did you see the LTE in the Current? Sounds like everyone I know: frustrated that a generally good plan is being nitpicked, while the ANC grandstands and ignores constituents requests for better amenities.

Better amenities? The area can't even fill the retail spaces it has. Much of Cathedral Commons is unleased. The megaplex at 4000 Wisconsin has empty storefronts, as does the block to the north at Van Ness and Wisconsin. If FDR's slogan was a chicken in every pot, Ward 3 Vision's can be a tanning salon (and bank) in every block. Because that's basically the "amenities" that result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post ever can cover this controversy?

Perhaps it's not a controversy at all. Did you see the LTE in the Current? Sounds like everyone I know: frustrated that a generally good plan is being nitpicked, while the ANC grandstands and ignores constituents requests for better amenities.

I found that LTE confusing. Why is a young couple that just moved from downtown to a house they bought a couple blocks from Bloomingdales and Lord & Taylor writing the Current to complain about fast food and retail in general in Tenleytown, and saying that if we just allow taller buildings on the GDS property, that would be a reasonable exchange to revitalize the area?

Sounds like the classic local "astroturf" PR campaign where the developer group pays SAHMs $10 for a list serv posting, maybe $20 for a published LTE.

[Anonymous]

Where is the Washington Post story about the neighbors outrage? This is a debate about the future of Tenleytown. It's a debate that puts a school with deep pockets and influential parents against a neighborhood that is diverse economically. It has Mary Cheh, parent and council board member and Washington Post editors and a shadowy smart growth front group on one side, against a band of upset neighbors in another. For the Post to drop the ball and not provide coverage is a failure of journalism and possibly a failure of journalistic ethics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is the Washington Post story about the neighbors outrage? This is a debate about the future of Tenleytown. It's a debate that puts a school with deep pockets and influential parents against a neighborhood that is diverse economically. It has Mary Cheh, parent and council board member and Washington Post editors and a shadowy smart growth front group on one side, against a band of upset neighbors in another. For the Post to drop the ball and not provide coverage is a failure of journalism and possibly a failure of journalistic ethics.

Don't look to Mary Cheh for help. She's been in the tank for big development since she first went on the council. I can think of only two exceptions where she wasn't. After initially supporting the Janney condo tower giveaway, she did an about-face and opposed it when it became clear that her constituents in the area were overwhelmingly opposed. The second was when she took the neighbor's side to try to mitigate the impact of the new AU law school campus. But everyone assumed that she was probably motivated more by a desire to beat up a rival law school, as she's been a professor for years at GW.

[Anonymous]

Nobody would or should look at Cheh for help on this. It's part of the smart growth agenda.'I was for smart growth but now I'm against it. After. A lot of thought, I come down on the side of organic growth. Smart growth seems to have been overtaken by developers.

[Anonymous]

What is organic growth? Smart growth is actually a thing, with a definition. In this case, it is focusing density on the transit rich avenue. And, I would argue that this is organic. There is a former car dealership and a grocery store with a large surface lot. Both can be put to more productive use for housing, retail and a school. It is all infill.

So what is organic growth?

[Anonymous]

Organic growth is not dictated by developers and special interest groups which is what is happening at Gds

[Anonymous]

This is pretty funny. Without developers, there would be no growth. I bet the house or building you live in was built by a developer.

An incredibly naive position. So are you saying that there should be no more development or redevelopment?

Are you saying that the vacant car dealership should just remain vacant until the zombie apocalypse?

[Anonymous]

I do wonder if GDS is trying to cram too much into its adjacent sites. For example, because it is trying to monetize the Wisconsin Ave. property, instead of putting a school building there and a playing field on the Safeway site, GDS is having to put a playing field for small children four stories up in the air. Anyone who walks this part of Wisconsin Ave from north of the GDS site to Fort Reno knows that it's one of the windiest spots in the area, and buildings tend to magnify the wind effects. I hope that someone at GDS has studied the impact of having a very elevated playing field at that location with two tall thin buildings across the street. It's not going to be a very pleasant place for kids' games. Perhaps good advice to members of the school community is to "hold onto your hats!"

[Anonymous]

Organic growth means development that is not directed by some shadowy "smart growth" group that has ties to dc council members and private schools.

[Anonymous]

Still not defining it.

You won't get change and evolution without developers.

What do you propose for the parcels in question and more importantly, how do you suggest financing it?

[Anonymous]

Financing it is not my problem. I was born and raised in DC including a childhood in Tenleytown. gds needs to rethink what it's doing. It's reputation as a progressive school is getting trashed. It's weird obsession on this board with Harvard and how it compares to other schools and their celebrity students makes it seem like a wannabe school that is turning its back on its history. I want Tenleytown to evolve, but I don't trust the smart growth crowd anymore. What I thought was an interesting approach to urban planning now seems like a front group for rich private school families and developers.

[Anonymous]

Developers can have it as far as I am concerned -- but only so long as they work within a principled zoning structure which balances competing interests. Unless developers are constrained by a zoning structure that is not corrupted by special interests at the expense of the common good, they will foul up a neighborhood for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Financing it is not my problem. I was born and raised in DC including a childhood in Tenleytown. gds needs to rethink what it's doing. It's reputation as a progressive school is getting trashed. It's weird obsession on this board with Harvard and how it compares to other schools and their celebrity students makes it seem like a wannabe school that is turning its back on its history. I want Tenleytown to evolve, but I don't trust the smart growth crowd anymore. What I thought was an interesting approach to urban planning now seems like a front group for rich private school families and developers.

Wishful thinking is great. I would love unicorns that fart rainbows too, but that won't address the empty spaces and blight in the neighborhood. You say you want organic growth, whatever the hell that is, but don't offer solutions to how to fill the vacant spaces such as the former car dealership. Yes, financing isn't your problem, because you don't own the land and are playing armchair property owner. If you have a real solution, put the money together and develop the property as you wish. In the mean time, the rest of us in the neighborhood want to add the retail and affordable housing that this project should provide. It is better than tumbleweeds.


(and I agree with the ANC that there should be more affordable housing than the less than minimal amount GDS is proposing).