What’s happening with the old White Flint mall development?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who is paying the real estate taxes on this land?

https://lerner.com/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The site isn’t commercially viable right now. The fact that it isn’t commercially viable tells you everything that you need to know about Montgomery County’s economy.

Alternative explanation: the property owners are sitting on it, waiting for ... something.

If the site were commercially viable now they wouldn’t be sitting and waiting. They would be building and making money.

Nope. That's something I don't understand about MoCo, lots of large pieces of commercial property that are just allowed to deteriorate and owners don't seem to care.

Land banking is not a only-in-MoCo phenomenon.

It’s harmful to communities and to the housing supply, which is why it should be taxed. You’d think that the YIMBYs would be screaming loudly about this at least in the interest of intellectual consistency but they never do.

Then you're not paying attention. Many Georgists are YIMBYs/many YIMBYs are Georgists.

You must not be paying attention because the YIMBYs we have in Montgomery County are supply siders, especially the most influential ones. Friedson himself has said that he only wants to offer carrots, without any sticks. As a result, there’s comparatively little risk in banking land and waiting to build, because there’s a widespread belief that the county council will bail you out with a subsidy if building costs go up and will never impose a punitive cost itself. The incentives are already stacked against maximizing supply (because a shortage is more profitable than a glut) and the council has reliably come in reduce the risks of waiting, making waiting the clearly better choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The site isn’t commercially viable right now. The fact that it isn’t commercially viable tells you everything that you need to know about Montgomery County’s economy.

Alternative explanation: the property owners are sitting on it, waiting for ... something.

If the site were commercially viable now they wouldn’t be sitting and waiting. They would be building and making money.

Nope. That's something I don't understand about MoCo, lots of large pieces of commercial property that are just allowed to deteriorate and owners don't seem to care.

Land banking is not a only-in-MoCo phenomenon.

It’s harmful to communities and to the housing supply, which is why it should be taxed. You’d think that the YIMBYs would be screaming loudly about this at least in the interest of intellectual consistency but they never do.

Then you're not paying attention. Many Georgists are YIMBYs/many YIMBYs are Georgists.

You must not be paying attention because the YIMBYs we have in Montgomery County are supply siders, especially the most influential ones. Friedson himself has said that he only wants to offer carrots, without any sticks. As a result, there’s comparatively little risk in banking land and waiting to build, because there’s a widespread belief that the county council will bail you out with a subsidy if building costs go up and will never impose a punitive cost itself. The incentives are already stacked against maximizing supply (because a shortage is more profitable than a glut) and the council has reliably come in reduce the risks of waiting, making waiting the clearly better choice.

Friedson is not every YIMBY. I'm not sure he's even any YIMBY. Has he ever said he was?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The site isn’t commercially viable right now. The fact that it isn’t commercially viable tells you everything that you need to know about Montgomery County’s economy.

Alternative explanation: the property owners are sitting on it, waiting for ... something.

If the site were commercially viable now they wouldn’t be sitting and waiting. They would be building and making money.

Nope. That's something I don't understand about MoCo, lots of large pieces of commercial property that are just allowed to deteriorate and owners don't seem to care.

Land banking is not a only-in-MoCo phenomenon.

It’s harmful to communities and to the housing supply, which is why it should be taxed. You’d think that the YIMBYs would be screaming loudly about this at least in the interest of intellectual consistency but they never do.

Then you're not paying attention. Many Georgists are YIMBYs/many YIMBYs are Georgists.

You must not be paying attention because the YIMBYs we have in Montgomery County are supply siders, especially the most influential ones. Friedson himself has said that he only wants to offer carrots, without any sticks. As a result, there’s comparatively little risk in banking land and waiting to build, because there’s a widespread belief that the county council will bail you out with a subsidy if building costs go up and will never impose a punitive cost itself. The incentives are already stacked against maximizing supply (because a shortage is more profitable than a glut) and the council has reliably come in reduce the risks of waiting, making waiting the clearly better choice.

Friedson is not every YIMBY. I'm not sure he's even any YIMBY. Has he ever said he was?

Doesn’t really matter so it’s a waste of time arguing about it.

The point is there are no Georgists in the conversation. It’s all supply siders. There’s no diversity whatsoever in the discussion at Planning Board or Council levels, so we keep pursuing slight variations of the same policies that have driven housing costs higher.

[Anonymous]

Someone should suggest to them - the St. James 2. They will make $ hand over fist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone should suggest to them - the St. James 2. They will make $ hand over fist.

Would be a great centerpiece for a mixed use development. Add in a bunch of apartments, some restaurants, and some small professional offices and you’d have an instant hit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The site isn’t commercially viable right now. The fact that it isn’t commercially viable tells you everything that you need to know about Montgomery County’s economy.

Alternative explanation: the property owners are sitting on it, waiting for ... something.

If the site were commercially viable now they wouldn’t be sitting and waiting. They would be building and making money.

Nope. That's something I don't understand about MoCo, lots of large pieces of commercial property that are just allowed to deteriorate and owners don't seem to care.

Land banking is not a only-in-MoCo phenomenon.

It’s harmful to communities and to the housing supply, which is why it should be taxed. You’d think that the YIMBYs would be screaming loudly about this at least in the interest of intellectual consistency but they never do.

Then you're not paying attention. Many Georgists are YIMBYs/many YIMBYs are Georgists.

You must not be paying attention because the YIMBYs we have in Montgomery County are supply siders, especially the most influential ones. Friedson himself has said that he only wants to offer carrots, without any sticks. As a result, there’s comparatively little risk in banking land and waiting to build, because there’s a widespread belief that the county council will bail you out with a subsidy if building costs go up and will never impose a punitive cost itself. The incentives are already stacked against maximizing supply (because a shortage is more profitable than a glut) and the council has reliably come in reduce the risks of waiting, making waiting the clearly better choice.

Friedson is not every YIMBY. I'm not sure he's even any YIMBY. Has he ever said he was?

What does that mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The site isn’t commercially viable right now. The fact that it isn’t commercially viable tells you everything that you need to know about Montgomery County’s economy.

Alternative explanation: the property owners are sitting on it, waiting for ... something.

If the site were commercially viable now they wouldn’t be sitting and waiting. They would be building and making money.

Nope. That's something I don't understand about MoCo, lots of large pieces of commercial property that are just allowed to deteriorate and owners don't seem to care.

Land banking is not a only-in-MoCo phenomenon.

It’s harmful to communities and to the housing supply, which is why it should be taxed. You’d think that the YIMBYs would be screaming loudly about this at least in the interest of intellectual consistency but they never do.

Then you're not paying attention. Many Georgists are YIMBYs/many YIMBYs are Georgists.

You must not be paying attention because the YIMBYs we have in Montgomery County are supply siders, especially the most influential ones. Friedson himself has said that he only wants to offer carrots, without any sticks. As a result, there’s comparatively little risk in banking land and waiting to build, because there’s a widespread belief that the county council will bail you out with a subsidy if building costs go up and will never impose a punitive cost itself. The incentives are already stacked against maximizing supply (because a shortage is more profitable than a glut) and the council has reliably come in reduce the risks of waiting, making waiting the clearly better choice.

Friedson is not every YIMBY. I'm not sure he's even any YIMBY. Has he ever said he was?

Doesn’t really matter so it’s a waste of time arguing about it.

The point is there are no Georgists in the conversation. It’s all supply siders. There’s no diversity whatsoever in the discussion at Planning Board or Council levels, so we keep pursuing slight variations of the same policies that have driven housing costs higher.

If so - now's your chance! Wouldn't you be happy to have a chance to argue FOR something, for a change?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone should suggest to them - the St. James 2. They will make $ hand over fist.

BARF! Yuck.

[Anonymous]

We need affordable housing there

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is happening with the site where White Flint Mall used to be? It’s sitting empty for years now and just a bunch of overgrowth and rubble.

Did some Googling but the articles and posts were a few years old. Is the plan for a walkable retail area still in play? It’s an eyesore and drags down the whole strip.

There was something in the news about this development. Wasn't the plan to develop a Health Sciences campus either for a university or for additional research space for existing Biotech firms in MoCo? They renamed the metro station from White Flint to North Bethesda station.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is happening with the site where White Flint Mall used to be? It’s sitting empty for years now and just a bunch of overgrowth and rubble.

Did some Googling but the articles and posts were a few years old. Is the plan for a walkable retail area still in play? It’s an eyesore and drags down the whole strip.

There was something in the news about this development. Wasn't the plan to develop a Health Sciences campus either for a university or for additional research space for existing Biotech firms in MoCo? They renamed the metro station from White Flint to North Bethesda station.

The new UMd Institute for Health Computing signed a 10-year lease earlier this year but the building isn’t on the old White Flint property. It isn’t even a reasonable walk from the old White Flint Mall property or to a metro station. That the lease is for 10 years should tell you something about how far off development at the old White Flint Mall property. Then there’s the question of whether biotechs even want to move out of their office parks, which offer cheaper rents and more flexible space than compact urban commercial development does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need affordable housing there

We need business there. But nobody wants to do business in MoCo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need affordable housing there

We need business there. But nobody wants to do business in MoCo

This is ridiculous. There are an absolute ton of developments going up in bethesda, all along rockville pike, kensington, really everywhere you go. This is clearly an issue with THIS parcel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need affordable housing there

We need business there. But nobody wants to do business in MoCo

This is ridiculous. There are an absolute ton of developments going up in bethesda, all along rockville pike, kensington, really everywhere you go. This is clearly an issue with THIS parcel.

We have residential developments going up in those places. What we need is commercial. The low business demand is suppressing both commercial and residential development in MoCo.