Mary Cheh has turned Cleveland Park/Cleveland Park North into her personal political asset

[Anonymous]

Cheh works for GWU and has AU in her back pocket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer facadomizing to razing, but would prefer even more that the building remain pristine. Facadomizing gets pretty Disney/new Times Square pretty fast.

2000 Pennsylvania Ave, "Red Lion Row," is an example of how facadomy is not historic preservation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Pennsylvania_Avenue#/media/File:2000Penn.jpg

Yes they did this when I was a kid. I was thinking of this the other day because there is a last original townhouse people want GW (the owner) to "save" down.there and it's falling on deaf ears. Presumably something like this could work down there. However the Uptown is pristine. Whole block is. Why mess with a good thing. Don't get it.

The National Register of Historic Places nomination documents state that the Uptown is part of the most intact, unified Art Deco commercial strip in Washington, DC. Worth preserving, and not with 10 floor concrete and glass boxes on top.

Ok, so you prefer that it just sit empty for the next 100 years? That will be GREAT for Cleveland Park.

If the Uptown parcel's height is limited to 40-45 feet (which is the limit under current zoning), then the theater owners may have an incentive to sell to a nonprofit that wants to structure an Avalon-type solution. It wouldn't make economic sense under current zoning to redevelop the theater into housing and commercial

However, if the parcel is up zoned significantly, as Mary Cheh's comprehensive plan/FLUM change seems to faciliate so that the permissible height becomes 10 stories, then the outcome is very different. The property owners would be fools not to sell the property for dense mixed-use development, or try to develop it themselves. Indeed, the economic incentives for massive development become irresistible. Keeping the Uptown as a theater/arts venue becomes visually impossible.

Thanks a lot, Mary Cheh. You just cost the Washington community the Uptown.

+!
“Our generation has built a lot, but your generation will have to work hard to heal all that.”

[Anonymous]

So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

Why do you think livability and walkability are at odds with density? Density increases walkability and livability. The metro station and bus lines aren't any further away if a parcel of land is developed into a five-story condo building instead of a single-family home. Density makes it viable for more businesses to put down roots in neighborhoods, which enables you to patronize a local neighborhood business instead of having to schlep over to another neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

Why do you think livability and walkability are at odds with density? Density increases walkability and livability. The metro station and bus lines aren't any further away if a parcel of land is developed into a five-story condo building instead of a single-family home. Density makes it viable for more businesses to put down roots in neighborhoods, which enables you to patronize a local neighborhood business instead of having to schlep over to another neighborhood.

I like this pretense of ignorance in understanding what PP is talking about. How juvenile you GGW types are. If your objective is to turn DC into Manhattan, then why not move to Manhattan?

The idea of targeting development around a transit system that has been steadily and systematically losing ridership is dumb. People are not taking it anyway so there’s no purpose to make it the centerpiece of a strategy. Everything you GGW types has advocated has been a failure. I think we’ve had enough of your galaxy brain bad ideas coupled with the certainty and confidence despite being continually wrong that only a privileged man could possess.

My recommendation is go buy a copy of Sim City and leave the rest of us alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

Why do you think livability and walkability are at odds with density? Density increases walkability and livability. The metro station and bus lines aren't any further away if a parcel of land is developed into a five-story condo building instead of a single-family home. Density makes it viable for more businesses to put down roots in neighborhoods, which enables you to patronize a local neighborhood business instead of having to schlep over to another neighborhood.

Ha! Increased dense mixed-use "smart growth" development seems to result in more investor-driven projects seeking national chains and other well-capitalized corporate businesses. So we keep getting more CVS stores, bank branches, SweetGreens and Chipotles. Not to knock them, but the locally-owned businesses are no longer seen as desirable tenants as developers want their projects to be investment-worthy. So the result is fewer locally-owned businesses can put down roots -- or even stay -- in neighborhoods. Case in point is Cleveland Park where the landlord of Firehook, which had been in space for years, refused to renew Firehook's lease because it is marketing the property in anticipation of new uphoning and potentially massive redevelopment. Thanks, Cheh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer facadomizing to razing, but would prefer even more that the building remain pristine. Facadomizing gets pretty Disney/new Times Square pretty fast.

2000 Pennsylvania Ave, "Red Lion Row," is an example of how facadomy is not historic preservation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Pennsylvania_Avenue#/media/File:2000Penn.jpg

Yes they did this when I was a kid. I was thinking of this the other day because there is a last original townhouse people want GW (the owner) to "save" down.there and it's falling on deaf ears. Presumably something like this could work down there. However the Uptown is pristine. Whole block is. Why mess with a good thing. Don't get it.

The National Register of Historic Places nomination documents state that the Uptown is part of the most intact, unified Art Deco commercial strip in Washington, DC. Worth preserving, and not with 10 floor concrete and glass boxes on top.

Ok, so you prefer that it just sit empty for the next 100 years? That will be GREAT for Cleveland Park.

If the Uptown parcel's height is limited to 40-45 feet (which is the limit under current zoning), then the theater owners may have an incentive to sell to a nonprofit that wants to structure an Avalon-type solution. It wouldn't make economic sense under current zoning to redevelop the theater into housing and commercial

However, if the parcel is up zoned significantly, as Mary Cheh's comprehensive plan/FLUM change seems to faciliate so that the permissible height becomes 10 stories, then the outcome is very different. The property owners would be fools not to sell the property for dense mixed-use development, or try to develop it themselves. Indeed, the economic incentives for massive development become irresistible. Keeping the Uptown as a theater/arts venue becomes visually impossible.

Thanks a lot, Mary Cheh. You just cost the Washington community the Uptown.

The Uptown is closed. Mary Cheh has nothing to do with the financial viability of a white elephant theater.

But Cheh and her developer-friends have everything to do with "up-FLUMming" (maybe "FLUM up" is more apt?) the Uptown site, which will create perverse economic incentives to redevelop the Uptown property into dense mixed-use development. So thanks to Cheh, the financial viability of the Uptown as a theater and arts venue has been undermined, as the owners look to realize a bigger return by selling for intensive development.

[Anonymous]

Isn't it way past time for that horrid council member to retire?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it way past time for that horrid council member to retire?

A classic Democrat. 71 years old and been in office for 14 years but refuses to pass the mantle. She’ll probably try to stay in office into her 80s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who is spearheading the effort to "Save the Uptown" and the character of the block? I feel the same way about Tenleytown. No need for any more building up. Our low, commercial hubs have their own charm.

They may have charm, but they are not economically viable, and certainly not on top of metro stations. Where else does it make sense to focus density, if not on top of metro station and bus corridors?

You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

Anacostia has metro and buses. Please don't comment on communities you have never visited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You know DC is a tiny nutshell of a city with excellent interconnected bus and metro transit? We are not talking LA here. The only two areas that seem remote/underserved by public transit would be Spring Valley and Anacostia. The rest of the city is accessible WHEREVEER you are. Why density? Why not livable, walkable neighborhoods with the greenery and charm and low height that people love about DC? Spread your little money-making building projects around more evenly and leave the historic aspects of our city--that make our city our city and not generic anytown USA--alone.

Because the region spent billions of dollars to build and billions more to maintain a fixed rail transportation system. This isn't a "I got mine so you can't have any" type of city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I like this pretense of ignorance in understanding what PP is talking about. How juvenile you GGW types are. If your objective is to turn DC into Manhattan, then why not move to Manhattan?

The idea of targeting development around a transit system that has been steadily and systematically losing ridership is dumb. People are not taking it anyway so there’s no purpose to make it the centerpiece of a strategy. Everything you GGW types has advocated has been a failure. I think we’ve had enough of your galaxy brain bad ideas coupled with the certainty and confidence despite being continually wrong that only a privileged man could possess.

My recommendation is go buy a copy of Sim City and leave the rest of us alone.

So we should just mothball the metro system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer facadomizing to razing, but would prefer even more that the building remain pristine. Facadomizing gets pretty Disney/new Times Square pretty fast.

2000 Pennsylvania Ave, "Red Lion Row," is an example of how facadomy is not historic preservation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Pennsylvania_Avenue#/media/File:2000Penn.jpg

Yes they did this when I was a kid. I was thinking of this the other day because there is a last original townhouse people want GW (the owner) to "save" down.there and it's falling on deaf ears. Presumably something like this could work down there. However the Uptown is pristine. Whole block is. Why mess with a good thing. Don't get it.

The National Register of Historic Places nomination documents state that the Uptown is part of the most intact, unified Art Deco commercial strip in Washington, DC. Worth preserving, and not with 10 floor concrete and glass boxes on top.

Ok, so you prefer that it just sit empty for the next 100 years? That will be GREAT for Cleveland Park.

If the Uptown parcel's height is limited to 40-45 feet (which is the limit under current zoning), then the theater owners may have an incentive to sell to a nonprofit that wants to structure an Avalon-type solution. It wouldn't make economic sense under current zoning to redevelop the theater into housing and commercial

However, if the parcel is up zoned significantly, as Mary Cheh's comprehensive plan/FLUM change seems to faciliate so that the permissible height becomes 10 stories, then the outcome is very different. The property owners would be fools not to sell the property for dense mixed-use development, or try to develop it themselves. Indeed, the economic incentives for massive development become irresistible. Keeping the Uptown as a theater/arts venue becomes visually impossible.

Thanks a lot, Mary Cheh. You just cost the Washington community the Uptown.

The Uptown is closed. Mary Cheh has nothing to do with the financial viability of a white elephant theater.

But Cheh and her developer-friends have everything to do with "up-FLUMming" (maybe "FLUM up" is more apt?) the Uptown site, which will create perverse economic incentives to redevelop the Uptown property into dense mixed-use development. So thanks to Cheh, the financial viability of the Uptown as a theater and arts venue has been undermined, as the owners look to realize a bigger return by selling for intensive development.

I love that you make Cheh the whipping boy of all your grievances. Bottom line, the theater was going to close with or without the pandemic. You still haven't answer my question...what should become of it now that it is no longer viable as a movie theater?