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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How old is Chuck Grassley?

[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.

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

My comment is that like Spring Valley it is not super convenient as compared to other parts of DC, Takes a little doing to get here you want to go downtown. it could use more services and they were looking at further forms of transit. And yes I have visited. Holier than though much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Metro can carry on. Mothball building high rises all over it. Not necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Community space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Community space.

A nonprofit, historic movie palace. Like the Avalon, but better.

What the community doesn't want: "The Commons at the Uptown" or similar generic mixed-use dreck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

You've got in wrong. Cheh makes Cleveland Park/North Cleveland Park the whipping boy of all of her grievances. Time for "Tysons Mary" to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

You've got in wrong. Cheh makes Cleveland Park/North Cleveland Park the whipping boy of all of her grievances. Time for "Tysons Mary" to go.

You shouldn’t respond to this person. They routinely will demand that you provide answers to pressing questions and if you cannot then they prevail, or something. Very odd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Your “solution” is to try to force people into tiny boxes and to take it even if they clearly don’t want to and have found superior transportation choices for themselves and at a time when it is uncertain that ridership will ever recover because many people will likely continue working from home? I severely doubt these are choices that you have made for yourself.

[Anonymous]

The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

How old is Chuck Grassley?

Is he a Democrat? Or is this whataboutism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

What’s the pricing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

What’s the pricing?

Forget the pricing, I just looked at the sketch drawings and Wisconsin Ave is going to be forever unusable once this is done. It’s friggin enormous. I count 7 buildings behind the Fannie Mae building. How did this ever get approved based on traffic impacts alone? They also refuse to release pricing, but entry price will easily be $700k from the looks of things. I’m not sure how this development will support the more supply reduces price thesis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

What’s the pricing?

Forget the pricing, I just looked at the sketch drawings and Wisconsin Ave is going to be forever unusable once this is done. It’s friggin enormous. I count 7 buildings behind the Fannie Mae building. How did this ever get approved based on traffic impacts alone? They also refuse to release pricing, but entry price will easily be $700k from the looks of things. I’m not sure how this development will support the more supply reduces price thesis.

if you want to test drive Wisconsin, look at how DC let the develop install a new traffic signal between the existing signals at Rodman/Sidwell garage and the other signal at the post office. The new intersection will be the primary entrance to the new complex and will be how the big Wegmans 18-wheelers exit (on an upgrade to Wisconsin Ave.). The developer did not want commercial traffic using the old driveway to the north of the Fannie Building because it would route the traffic next to the high-end residences it is selling. So instead, the developer got DC to let it build the new access road on the complex's south side, next to McLean Gardens. Now imagine how it will be when through traffic on Wisconsin has to stop for three signals within a distance of about 130 yards, and how the big rigs will exit the new access road and make tight turns north or south on Wisconsin into stopped traffic at the Rodman and post office signals.

No wonder DDOT's long term plan is to divert more traffic from Wisconsin to Reno.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

What’s the pricing?

Forget the pricing, I just looked at the sketch drawings and Wisconsin Ave is going to be forever unusable once this is done. It’s friggin enormous. I count 7 buildings behind the Fannie Mae building. How did this ever get approved based on traffic impacts alone? They also refuse to release pricing, but entry price will easily be $700k from the looks of things. I’m not sure how this development will support the more supply reduces price thesis.

Plus Sidwells new lower school campus will be opening directly across the street. Bear that in mind. And that Wisconsin and Connecticut are supposedly evacuation lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cheapest possible housing is about to come to Cleveland Park in the form of hundreds of Condos in the old fFannie Mae building. If that doesn’t elevate the housing problem, what will?

What’s the pricing?

Forget the pricing, I just looked at the sketch drawings and Wisconsin Ave is going to be forever unusable once this is done. It’s friggin enormous. I count 7 buildings behind the Fannie Mae building. How did this ever get approved based on traffic impacts alone? They also refuse to release pricing, but entry price will easily be $700k from the looks of things. I’m not sure how this development will support the more supply reduces price thesis.

if you want to test drive Wisconsin, look at how DC let the develop install a new traffic signal between the existing signals at Rodman/Sidwell garage and the other signal at the post office. The new intersection will be the primary entrance to the new complex and will be how the big Wegmans 18-wheelers exit (on an upgrade to Wisconsin Ave.). The developer did not want commercial traffic using the old driveway to the north of the Fannie Building because it would route the traffic next to the high-end residences it is selling. So instead, the developer got DC to let it build the new access road on the complex's south side, next to McLean Gardens. Now imagine how it will be when through traffic on Wisconsin has to stop for three signals within a distance of about 130 yards, and how the big rigs will exit the new access road and make tight turns north or south on Wisconsin into stopped traffic at the Rodman and post office signals.

No wonder DDOT's long term plan is to divert more traffic from Wisconsin to Reno.

Has anyone spoken to the developer about workers parking illegally all over the neighborhood for the last 18 months? Now that the world is "opening up" again, the developer needs to take a look (besides willful ignorance) at where the workers are parking and provide them some paid solutions.