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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Parking. Parking. Parking.

They simply cannot believe that an enjoyable pedestrian envrionment, much less more space for eating tables, is better for business that housing 30 cars during the day and evening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you under the impression that the suburbs are devoid of big-box stores and restaurants?

My basic belief is that development and use of public space (anywhere in the US, suburbs or cities) should not be obstructed by the whims of a few people who are selfish and want nothing to change. It’s obvious to any neutral observer that a strip
mall is an absolutely idiotic use of space in Cleveland Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Parking. Parking. Parking.

They simply cannot believe that an enjoyable pedestrian envrionment, much less more space for eating tables, is better for business that housing 30 cars during the day and evening.

Got it. That lane was so chaotic when it was open to cars; as a driver I hated it! I just can’t imagine living close to that strip and seeing its closure as anything other than upgrade.

[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.

But, you're a renter, and you'll be gone in less than 3 years for reasons having nothing to do with walkable shops. You'll likely locate to a smaller, less expensive city in order to buy property.

So your opinions have less weight.

[Anonymous]

And this...is why DFER is dangerous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But, you're a renter, and you'll be gone in less than 3 years for reasons having nothing to do with walkable shops. You'll likely locate to a smaller, less expensive city in order to buy property.

So your opinions have less weight.

The spokesperson for the Cleveland Park Citizens Association has entered the chat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And this...is why DFER is dangerous

there is nothing dangerous about this. and you know what? after I saw Catholic schools remain open in this area while public schools closed their doors (despite all the tax dollars they get!) I became 100% in favor of religious schools getting public money. So yeah, another way leftist hoisted themselves on their own petard here.

I’m voting today in Ward 6 and may put Goulet down as a write-in for council instead of Allen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But, you're a renter, and you'll be gone in less than 3 years for reasons having nothing to do with walkable shops. You'll likely locate to a smaller, less expensive city in order to buy property.

So your opinions have less weight.

Lol what makes you think I’m a renter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you under the impression that the suburbs are devoid of big-box stores and restaurants?

My basic belief is that development and use of public space (anywhere in the US, suburbs or cities) should not be obstructed by the whims of a few people who are selfish and want nothing to change. It’s obvious to any neutral observer that a strip
mall is an absolutely idiotic use of space in Cleveland Park.

You are incapable of reading comprehension, which also explains a lot.

Your aesthetic choice is big box stores, but in the city! How vibrant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But, you're a renter, and you'll be gone in less than 3 years for reasons having nothing to do with walkable shops. You'll likely locate to a smaller, less expensive city in order to buy property.

So your opinions have less weight.

Lol what makes you think I’m a renter?

They cannot imagine other homeowners don't think just like them. It is quite sad actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you under the impression that the suburbs are devoid of big-box stores and restaurants?

My basic belief is that development and use of public space (anywhere in the US, suburbs or cities) should not be obstructed by the whims of a few people who are selfish and want nothing to change. It’s obvious to any neutral observer that a strip
mall is an absolutely idiotic use of space in Cleveland Park.

You are incapable of reading comprehension, which also explains a lot.

Your aesthetic choice is big box stores, but in the city! How vibrant.

I'm confused why you think this is about personal aesthetic choices ... ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And this...is why DFER is dangerous

there is nothing dangerous about this. and you know what? after I saw Catholic schools remain open in this area while public schools closed their doors (despite all the tax dollars they get!) I became 100% in favor of religious schools getting public money. So yeah, another way leftist hoisted themselves on their own petard here.

I’m voting today in Ward 6 and may put Goulet down as a write-in for council instead of Allen.

The issue isn't "religious schools" but rather public dollars going to subsidize religious schools. That is fine that YOU are okay with it. I am not, as I believe in the separation of Church and State. It is too bad our Supreme Court has lost its way and people like you are supporting it.