Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One development -- even if it is too big -- is not going to change the retail/restaurant landscape. The catchment area for these things is so broad that a single development does not make a difference.

As for the Pepco facility, that is a good candidate for eminent domain and redevelopment. Love to see that happen.

Ha! You think that would happen? With Pepco, Mayor Bowser is more like Mayor Bend-over.

[Anonymous]

That site should have been a 5 story mixed use building. Instead the same people fighting GDS dragged that proposal on to the point that the economic downtown killed it.

[Anonymous]

It's actually a tiny chunk. Pepco plans to sell the land next to the old substation after it finishes rebuilding it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's insane that nobody is covering this issue other than nw current.

It would be insane to give any credence to NIMBY neighbors who want to choose what goes on an empty lot but don't want to pony up the cash to buy it. The GDS plan fits well within the spirit of the zoning laws and comprehensive plan. If you don't like it, move to the burbs...or to a house a few blocks off Wisconsin Ave. These are the same type of neighbors who try to block people who buy ugly houses from tearing them down to build bigger, McMansions on the lot. Might not be my taste of where to live or how to spend my money, but if you buy the land you get to (basically) do what you want with it. The old crotchety neighbors need to chill!

This sounds like it was written either written by Ward 3 Vision or Mr. Payola.

Nope - written by a neighbor who loves to walk and is excited at the prospect of more retail/restaurants and neighbors.

I should also note that I think the fact that a huge chunk of valuable space on Wisconsin is being used for a Pepco power plant is ridiculous. And should be a lesson to all who oppose development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That site should have been a 5 story mixed use building. Instead the same people fighting GDS dragged that proposal on to the point that the economic downtown killed it.

A five story building would probably be matter of right at the Pepco site. However, instead of building matter of right, GD$ and the insiders group insist on bending the rules that apply to them, going for height that significantly exceeds regulations and the comprehensive plan and a plan so dense that it needs to borrow public space.

[Anonymous]

5 stories on Wisconsin Avenue and a little more over the Metro garage:


http://blog.developersagent.com/2007/07/new-condo-spotlight-5220-wisconsin-ave.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:5 stories on Wisconsin Avenue and a little more over the Metro garage:


http://blog.developersagent.com/2007/07/new-condo-spotlight-5220-wisconsin-ave.html

In view of the Pepco plan, would GDS agree to keep its proposed buildings to 5 stories at Wisconsin Ave.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:5 stories on Wisconsin Avenue and a little more over the Metro garage:


http://blog.developersagent.com/2007/07/new-condo-spotlight-5220-wisconsin-ave.html

The proposal for the site just north of the Pepco substation was not for a 5 story building. The building would have been 7 stories, 79 feet tall on Wisconsin Avenue (the highest elevation on the site). You can look at the drawing at your link more closely or read the text of the blog where it states that it is 7 stories or check the architectural plans that were filed. The maximum height for matter of right development for that site would be 50 feet.

The earlier proposal for the Martens site was for an 8-story building with 191 rental apartments and ground floor retail. The density requested was comparable to what GDS is requesting. The developer (Donohoe) in the application was relying on the assumption that a new plan for the area would be approved, overriding the then existing (and current) Comprehensive Plan designation of low density commercial or moderate density residential for that site. The Zoning Commission insisted that they would not consider the Donohoe proposal until after the new plan for the area was approved. The changes in the plan for the area that Donohoe wanted to rely on were never adopted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5 stories on Wisconsin Avenue and a little more over the Metro garage:


http://blog.developersagent.com/2007/07/new-condo-spotlight-5220-wisconsin-ave.html

The proposal for the site just north of the Pepco substation was not for a 5 story building. The building would have been 7 stories, 79 feet tall on Wisconsin Avenue (the highest elevation on the site). You can look at the drawing at your link more closely or read the text of the blog where it states that it is 7 stories or check the architectural plans that were filed. The maximum height for matter of right development for that site would be 50 feet.

The earlier proposal for the Martens site was for an 8-story building with 191 rental apartments and ground floor retail. The density requested was comparable to what GDS is requesting. The developer (Donohoe) in the application was relying on the assumption that a new plan for the area would be approved, overriding the then existing (and current) Comprehensive Plan designation of low density commercial or moderate density residential for that site. The Zoning Commission insisted that they would not consider the Donohoe proposal until after the new plan for the area was approved. The changes in the plan for the area that Donohoe wanted to rely on were never adopted.

So this would seem to be a further argument against granting GDS exceptional height and density.

[Anonymous]

5 stories to 8 stories are not exceptional heights. It is so ridiculous in a major city to suggest as such on a major road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:5 stories to 8 stories are not exceptional heights. It is so ridiculous in a major city to suggest as such on a major road.

What does the DC Comprehensive Plan, as approved by the Council, provide for this area?

[Anonymous]

Right. What is the plan for an avenue in a residential neighborhood when downtown is severely height-restricted?

And there is a significant difference between five and eight stories.

[Anonymous]

There are all sorts of 8 story buildings on Connecticut, Mass and Wisconsin Avenue. What is so sacrosanct about Tenleytown and Friendship Heights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are all sorts of 8 story buildings on Connecticut, Mass and Wisconsin Avenue. What is so sacrosanct about Tenleytown and Friendship Heights?

The Comprehensive Plan was enacted by the Council after many revisions and hearings. I realize that the Team of Aces may think that they're the smartest guys in the room, but I'll defer to the Council process rather than to GD$ on what height and density are right for Tenleytown.

[Anonymous]

The Council process which at the time was led by Mayor Barry (see the deal he brokered with Upper-Caucasia voters in the mid 1980's re-election).

Yes, that was an upstanding process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Council process which at the time was led by Mayor Barry (see the deal he brokered with Upper-Caucasia voters in the mid 1980's re-election).

Yes, that was an upstanding process.

Nice try, but surely Ward 3 Vision and the crony consultants can spin better than that.

The current Comprehensive Plan was new in 2006, and the Council reviewed and amended it several years later. All post Mayor Barry. From the DC government website:

"The Home Rule Act requires that the District government develop a Comprehensive Plan. This Plan is a general policy document that provides overall guidance for future planning and development of the city. The first Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1984 and 1985. In 2006 a new Comprehensive Plan was approved, which was the first major revision of the Plan. Subsequently, the first Amendment Cycle for the 2006 Comprehensive Plan was initiated in 2009. After concluding the approval process the amendments officially became effective on April 8, 2011."