Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just read in a Northwest Current editorial that the school is no longer including plans for a small pocket park at the top of 42nd street -- one of the featured amenities of the plan they presented to the ANC last fall. What the heck, GDS??!! what exactly is the school doing to offset the impact of all that extra traffic?

The theory is that when it was going to be 300 or so units, there would be plenty of money for neighborhood amenities, but now that it is essentially going to be a matter of right proposal, the monies for amenities are no longer available. And the local ANC Commissioner came out against the park even though they are the one who proposed it and advocated for it.

I was for it before I was against it.

[Anonymous]

The NW Current seems to say that GDS doesn't do a very good job of community engagement (despite the Team of Aces and its politically connected consultants).

[Anonymous]

Where has GDS said they are doing a matter of right proposal? I heard they were doing the biggest PUD they could do without a zoning map amendment.

[Anonymous]

22:57 is right. I think a PP assumed withdrawing the map amendment means it's a matter-of-right proposal. But it doesn't. It's still a PUD (which requires Zoning Commission approval) and even if the PUD itself was withdrawn, the school consolidation would require a "special exception" (which requires approval by the Board of Zoning Adjustment).

A 50 foot/five-story residential-retail building occupying 60% of the lot (and devoting 10% of the residential space to low and moderate income housing) could be developed as a matter of right on the Wisconsin Avenue properties.

[Anonymous]

Re plenty of money for neighborhood amenities. The proposed park is already public land and GDS was going to do a little hardscraping. Not much of a community amenity (given size and location) and a really minimal investment on the school's part. Especially since GDS seems to be asking to privatize parts of two public rights-of-way (over 6000 SF of land). And since, even without the map amendment, GDS is asking for permission to build almost twice the SF that it would be allowed as MOR (240,000 vs 123,000 SF).

[Anonymous]

I don't think they are going to be asking for public space or much more than is allowed matter of right anymore.

If I were them, I wouldn't do squat for the neighborhood, despite the Current editorial. The neighborhood has been nothing but hostile.

[Anonymous]

You are mistaken.

GDS is literally asking for (as in have filed a PUD application requesting) permission to build an extra 116,753 SF (basically 3 extra stories) on the Martens lot. And their site plans explicitly incorporate two strips of public land (one off Ellicott and another along 42nd Street), totaling 6,275 SF.

This *is* the revised PUD proposal, as modified on March 22, 2016. The original proposal was even greedier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they are going to be asking for public space or much more than is allowed matter of right anymore.

If I were them, I wouldn't do squat for the neighborhood, despite the Current editorial. The neighborhood has been nothing but hostile.

If this is the attitude of the school or its parents, it may plain why GDS has a poor reputation in the community.

[Anonymous]

explain

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they are going to be asking for public space or much more than is allowed matter of right anymore.

If I were them, I wouldn't do squat for the neighborhood, despite the Current editorial. The neighborhood has been nothing but hostile.

If this is the attitude of the school or its parents, it may plain why GDS has a poor reputation in the community.

explain

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Losing the Safeway, having to drive somewhere for middle-grocery shopping, having dead space on Wisconsin Avenue and having to deal with the car-pooling and suburban dopers, yes, pretty much a net loss.

Long time real estate person here. Expanding the presence of a strong school has never been a net negative for a neighborhood. Never. Just ask the property owners in Edgemoor, Bethesda. It might be a nuisance in the short term, but the rewards are tangible on the back end.

I can understand the presence of a good public school raising property values, but don't see how the general population benefits with a private school. Is there a private school near Edgemoor in Bethesda?

Wealthy educated people buying houses on the neighbourhood -you house value goes up. Plus hedonic pricing (look it up in Google please). Put it simply: would you prefer to have a landfield or a prision just near your house or a top private school?

Those aren't the only options -- nor are they realistic land uses given pre-existing land values and zoning. Pretty much any value that comes from having top private schools in the neighborhood has already been realized, whereas the hassles associated with more than doubling the school's size plus adding 250 apartments and retail in the same couple of blocks will negatively affect quality of life for homeowners in the immediate vicinity. In fact, the Head of School joked in one meeting with parents that this project should make buying up surrounding homes easier.

What an arrogant ass.

Jaw dropping.

[Anonymous]

Did today's new GDS thread just magically disappear?

[Anonymous]

It was removed. Try again with less specific details.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was removed. Try again with less specific details.

Wow. Not even locked.
Looks like it'll be a major showdown over there with this crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's so hot.

Anonymous wrote:Are you saying it was kinda slutty for GDS to get in bed with a developer? Cause that's actually kinda true.

That is so ridiculous. You praise capitalism but you are so ignorant that are unable to see it combined with the social justice concept.

The "social justice concept"?! GDS was asked publicly if they would consider including more "affordable" housing in the PUD and their answer was that they planned to include the statutory minimum, no more. This project seems more the case of those who claim to be doing good in fact doing well.

The social concept does not come with the real estate portion, but with what they do best: educating children. This is exahusting. Too tired to elaborate (anyhow, it would not matter, you would mot even be open to try to understand the point of view... To focused on your own possition.)

Then why do the real estate portion, other than as a favor to board insiders? The school should be concentrating on what they know how to do, "educating children," rather than playing point for some guys who read "The Art of the Deal" and fancy themselves as the Team of Aces.

Better financials might equal more financial aid (which is, indeed, already pretty generous) to allow less affluent families to attend the school.