Big GDS news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Until and unless population density increases, Tenleytown will continue to be a dreary strip surrounded by a startingly (for DC anyway) homogenous residential population. Of course the GDS development isn't going to solve problems caused by decades of chasing away any change, but it will be a step in the right direction of starting to create a more urban village within our great city.

For Pete's sake, Tenleytown already has a number of restaurants at lots of different price points, a variety of retail ranging from Best Buy to Whole Foods to hardware and shoe stores, with a regional destination retail and entertainment center within walking distance (or one Metro stop away) at Friendship Heights and other retail one mile to the south. It's hardly some dreary blighted area. No one wants to see vacant lots, but let's not look for the creeping generic Clarendonization of the community as some panacea either.

[Anonymous]

We don't want to become Clarendon or Bethesda! Tenleytown and AU Park are great places now. Why must everything now be "smart" dense (aka dumb) growth. There should be a place for lower density single family homes that will not be overshadowed by huge, looming ugly McSame apartment buildings bringing massive traffic and built to fund some really ugly campus for GDS. NO!!!

[Anonymous]

So you are opposed to increasing the tax base to help pay for our generous city services and you are opposed to more people living in the neighborhood, enjoying the same things that you are currently enjoying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I support GDS moving forward with a revised plan but I have no expectations that more condos or retail are going to improve the neighborhood in any way. There is nothing I like about GDS plan other than improving the school's facilities - I think every school should be allowed to do that. But condos and retail as a game changer - nope. it's just stacked boxes for people to live in.

Actually, each time a new development adds a few hundred more residents, it changes the equation for retailers and store owners who are deciding where to open a new place, so i reality, while this individual project may not change much (though there should be more ground floor retail space), the aggregate of more people will help provide the necessary demand for new and better places.

No, it doesn't. Look at marketing materials for storefronts -- the catchment areas are much larger -- often .5 to 5 mile radii, with population stats that look not only at residents but at the number of cars that pass the site, metrorail boarding data, workers, students, etc. No one assumes their customer base is limited to people who live within a few blocks. And retailers choosing a location care about rent, space, accessibility, visibility, synergies with other businesses. Proximity to 1200 private school students (and maybe another couple hundred AU law students/undergrads renting apartments) may be appealing to some business owners (orthodontists?), but it's not a demographic that will attract hipster biergartens or hot new restaurants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not suggesting another toy store. Suggesting anything that we can walk to in our own neighborhood other than a used car lot and barren streetscape.

I kind of like the businesses there now -- the bike store is absolutely terrific and and "used car lot" features antique and vintage autos. That's more interesting to me than six stories of hipster flats on top of yet another Five Guys and a Starbucks.

So how much do you plan to spend at the used car lot each year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I support GDS moving forward with a revised plan but I have no expectations that more condos or retail are going to improve the neighborhood in any way. There is nothing I like about GDS plan other than improving the school's facilities - I think every school should be allowed to do that. But condos and retail as a game changer - nope. it's just stacked boxes for people to live in.

Actually, each time a new development adds a few hundred more residents, it changes the equation for retailers and store owners who are deciding where to open a new place, so i reality, while this individual project may not change much (though there should be more ground floor retail space), the aggregate of more people will help provide the necessary demand for new and better places.

No, it doesn't. Look at marketing materials for storefronts -- the catchment areas are much larger -- often .5 to 5 mile radii, with population stats that look not only at residents but at the number of cars that pass the site, metrorail boarding data, workers, students, etc. No one assumes their customer base is limited to people who live within a few blocks. And retailers choosing a location care about rent, space, accessibility, visibility, synergies with other businesses. Proximity to 1200 private school students (and maybe another couple hundred AU law students/undergrads renting apartments) may be appealing to some business owners (orthodontists?), but it's not a demographic that will attract hipster biergartens or hot new restaurants.

Tell it to the property owners in Barracks Row, H Street and Navy Yard. You are absolutely wrong on this and clearly have never run a retail shop or restaurant.

[Anonymous]

Why? None of them chose to locate next door to a 1200 kid private school campus. And the other info (re what retail marketing looks like) is easily verifiable.

[Anonymous]

Isn't there supposed to be only one restaurant? So if we get one sitdown restaurant in front of GDS, that's a game changer?

Anonymous wrote:Unless you want to walk to an apartment or GDS's L/MS, then this project is unlikely to have much to offer you. Maybe another mini-mart or another fast casual place. I'm baffled by the suggestion that this project is going to make Tenleytown hip. There will be a clusterf**k of traffic a couple of times a day and even more students, which is part of what gives the area the kind of retail environment it has. Hardly a game-changer.

[Anonymous]

Lots of Tenleytowners long for the Safeway, sub-par as it was. You are out of touch if you don't see that.

Anonymous wrote:Urban planning 101. Not every bit of development has to be villagey, but should help increase pop density, which will then let the bits and pieces of Tenleytown that could actually be nice , then become nicer.

Is there anyone there who really longs for a decrepit Safeway or a Volvo dealership? Hard to see how things can go anywhere but up.

[Anonymous]

Except its gone because the likes of you scared off Safeway when they were going to develop the property themelves.

[Anonymous]

FIFY

"Except its gone because GDS offered far more for the property than it's value to any other bidder, and the PE company that acquired Safeway wouldn't turn down a windfall like that."

Anonymous wrote:Except its gone because the likes of you scared off Safeway when they were going to develop the property themelves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you are opposed to increasing the tax base to help pay for our generous city services and you are opposed to more people living in the neighborhood, enjoying the same things that you are currently enjoying?

I'm actually for cutting the DC budget to cut out waste, fraud and abuse, including the tens of millions (if not more) that DC spends on unqualified contractors and crony consultants. DC doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a wasteful spending problem. Cut out the waste, and there's more money to direct to schools and social services if the funds are actually targeted to the recipients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FIFY

"Except its gone because GDS offered far more for the property than it's value to any other bidder, and the PE company that acquired Safeway wouldn't turn down a windfall like that."

Anonymous wrote:Except its gone because the likes of you scared off Safeway when they were going to develop the property themelves.

Actually it was the proposal about a year before GDS bought the property that the NIMBYs fought., so no, you didn't fix it for me. This was the proposal to put 5 stories of housing on top of a Social-Safeway size store.

Alas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you are opposed to increasing the tax base to help pay for our generous city services and you are opposed to more people living in the neighborhood, enjoying the same things that you are currently enjoying?

I'm actually for cutting the DC budget to cut out waste, fraud and abuse, including the tens of millions (if not more) that DC spends on unqualified contractors and crony consultants. DC doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a wasteful spending problem. Cut out the waste, and there's more money to direct to schools and social services if the funds are actually targeted to the recipients.

And they've been saying that since Hamilton created the first debt. Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Ugh. This has turned into such a heavy lift for GDS. Are some people opposing the condos as a way of opposing the school's consolidation? Would the neighborhood be ok with GDS building what it has proposed for the school if they cut loose the development? (I'm talking in theory, not why doing is or is not possible.)