WaPo editorial calls out “machinations… of the council’s far left wing” in trying to stop Goulet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

[Anonymous]

Why were the NIMBYs in Cleveland Park against closing the service lane? And what's the relationship to redevelopment a la downtown Bethesda? I love the closure of the service lane but hate downtown Bethesda, but if I'm following (and I'm not sure I am), my views are contradictory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Then it can’t survive. You can’t hold back an entire block to preserve a single heritage business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why were the NIMBYs in Cleveland Park against closing the service lane? And what's the relationship to redevelopment a la downtown Bethesda? I love the closure of the service lane but hate downtown Bethesda, but if I'm following (and I'm not sure I am), my views are contradictory.

I have no idea. Either you or one of your YIMBY buddies mentioned Vace in Bethesda as a good example, when in fact it’s a terrible example.

If you are a resident of Cleveland Park, you may want to engage your neighbors on issues to understand their perspective, instead of presuming their motives and calling them names. Just a suggestion.

[Anonymous]

This whole division Y/NIMBY crap has to quit.

[Anonymous]

When sewage overflows and we run out of water, we are just people. Look at the CA fires. It helps to get along before!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Then it can’t survive. You can’t hold back an entire block to preserve a single heritage business.

Whether you want locally owned small businesses to thrive in your city is a policy choice. It’s interesting and quite telling which side of that choice you are on. Furthermore, I find it interesting that every YIMBY I encounter has such limited knowledge of the commercial real estate industry when this is supposed to be your thing. I guess it makes sense since you are all underemployed or self styled amateur planners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

Yes, I agree, the people who have lived in Cleveland Park for 30+ years have ruled over its decline. It is time to put a stop to it. That is why the new development there is a good thing, as are closing the service lane and adding bike lanes so more people can get there safely.

You need to show up and make your view known! If people like you don’t go to ANC meetings etc, then your elected officials think the cranks are the only opinions.

I think Cleveland Park in the City has done a great job of representing my views, and that is why people like Beau Finley are on the ANC now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Vace isn't going anywhere and that whole strip is protected by historic preservation. Perhaps there might be some 1-2 story addtions to the rear of some of those buildings, but it will be some time before that is considered economically viable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why were the NIMBYs in Cleveland Park against closing the service lane? And what's the relationship to redevelopment a la downtown Bethesda? I love the closure of the service lane but hate downtown Bethesda, but if I'm following (and I'm not sure I am), my views are contradictory.

I guess you missed the whole Cleveland PARK campaign. Its all about being able to drive 2 blocks down the hill to get a vacuum cleaner services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Then it can’t survive. You can’t hold back an entire block to preserve a single heritage business.

Whether you want locally owned small businesses to thrive in your city is a policy choice. It’s interesting and quite telling which side of that choice you are on. Furthermore, I find it interesting that every YIMBY I encounter has such limited knowledge of the commercial real estate industry when this is supposed to be your thing. I guess it makes sense since you are all underemployed or self styled amateur planners.

I don’t really care about small business. But if you want to pretend the NIMBY arguments are logical and fact-based …. a ha ha ha ha, no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Vace isn't going anywhere and that whole strip is protected by historic preservation. Perhaps there might be some 1-2 story addtions to the rear of some of those buildings, but it will be some time before that is considered economically viable.

You’re incorrect. The strip with Target is protected, because it’s the “first strip” mall in America. The buildings that house Vace, CVS, etc are not protected.

It’s incredible how you self styled savvy YIMBY urbanists know less about your thing than a random dude on the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Then it can’t survive. You can’t hold back an entire block to preserve a single heritage business.

Whether you want locally owned small businesses to thrive in your city is a policy choice. It’s interesting and quite telling which side of that choice you are on. Furthermore, I find it interesting that every YIMBY I encounter has such limited knowledge of the commercial real estate industry when this is supposed to be your thing. I guess it makes sense since you are all underemployed or self styled amateur planners.

I don’t really care about small business. But if you want to pretend the NIMBY arguments are logical and fact-based …. a ha ha ha ha, no.

Thanks for clarifying that you are actually an embarrassed suburbanite at heart. It’s also interesting that for you it’s also all about aesthetics. You just prefer the sterilized, chain store aesthetic but “walkable”. You will probably be more successful urbanizing the suburbs to achieve what you want than sterilizing the city to fit your aesthetic desires. What you also don’t really understand is that thriving small businesses are better for the local economy, both because profits stay home and because it’s more resilient.

The reason why you feel that you’re in such a pitched battle with your nemesis NIMBYs is because you are both so much alike. It’s really just a difference of opinion about aesthetics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why were the NIMBYs in Cleveland Park against closing the service lane? And what's the relationship to redevelopment a la downtown Bethesda? I love the closure of the service lane but hate downtown Bethesda, but if I'm following (and I'm not sure I am), my views are contradictory.

I have no idea. Either you or one of your YIMBY buddies mentioned Vace in Bethesda as a good example, when in fact it’s a terrible example.

If you are a resident of Cleveland Park, you may want to engage your neighbors on issues to understand their perspective, instead of presuming their motives and calling them names. Just a suggestion.

I don’t live in CP but am a longtime devoted Vace customer and live near enough that I’m in CP all the time. I still don’t understand what drove opposition to closing the service lane. So I’ll ask again without using any pejoratives: why were people, presumably (but maybe not!) those who want to limit development in CP, opposed to closing the service lane?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take it a step further

People complained about closing the service lane in Cleveland Park, how the former Babe's site in Tenley wasn't going to have parking, or how the 15 year 'battle" over Cathedral Commons was going to ruin the neighborhood. Yes all these things happened and pretty much nothing has changed.

Just better shops, more housing and better pedestrian experience.

Maybe it is time to stop listening to the NIMBYs in total and move on with the new development and progressive transportation initiatives.

the service lane debate is an evergreen one. The ANC 3C commissioners under 50 have been tagged with being "pro chain store" - not because they have proposed closing the service lane or because they are pro chain store, but because they are seen as a threat to the slow decline of CP.

“Take it a step further”. Commercial redevelopment of the strip for “density” will lead to higher commercial rents, which makes businesses like Vace or the antique jewelry store not feasible. In their place you will get more fast casual dining. The five over one cookie cutter experience turns every urban community into the bland equivalent of an outdoor suburban shopping mall. This is not what people imagine when diverse, vibrant urbanism is being discussed.

So you are saying that the density in Bethesda is harming the Vace there? Because if that is what you believe, I have bridge in Brooklyn I am happy to sell you for cheap.

There is no development of the strip that doesn’t involve the demolition of Vace. Whether in Bethesda or Cleveland Park, Vace cannot survive paying Class A commercial rents. If you don’t understand this, I don’t know what to tell you. Bethesda is actually a great example of this phenomenon. Not even Amazon Books could survive paying Class A rents there. For small businesses it’s a nightmare. Chef Tony’s was one of the best restaurants there. Go check where they had to relocate. Not even Nando’s could survive paying Class A rents there. If you think Bethesda is ideal urbanism that should be emulated for Cleveland Park, you’re going to convert a lot of people over to NIMBYism.

Vace isn't going anywhere and that whole strip is protected by historic preservation. Perhaps there might be some 1-2 story addtions to the rear of some of those buildings, but it will be some time before that is considered economically viable.

You’re incorrect. The strip with Target is protected, because it’s the “first strip” mall in America. The buildings that house Vace, CVS, etc are not protected.

It’s incredible how you self styled savvy YIMBY urbanists know less about your thing than a random dude on the internet.

Says someone who doesn't know what a historic district is, or what protections the structures within it enjoy.

Read up and come back here.