RIP Johnson's -- Now let's move on

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all sounds good, but here's the "money shot" quote:

While acknowledging that Johnson’s has been a
valued tenant and the neighboring community benefits from Johnson’s
services, our fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of limited
University resources dictated that we could not agree to an arrangement
with terms substantially below market value for the location.

A plant nursery just isn't going to be able to pay as much in rent as another yet national bank branch or a chain restaurant, and certainly won't offer to same real estate 'market value' potetnial as dense redevelopment into more "Generica" mixed-use. But in the process, we lose essential neighborhood-serving businesses on which the community has depended for a long time. As a tax-exempt organization that benefits from paying virtually no local taxes, AU should also consider its stewardship responsibilities in the community, rather than imagining itself as a wannabe hedge fund portfolio manager.

I disagree. Having Johnson's was not the best use of the space and it certainly shouldn't be up to AU to subsidize Johnson's business model. I would be disappointed if they get a bank branch or some other crappy tenant, but it certainly doesn't sound like that is the intention.

If Johnson's were so vital to the neighborhood and so supported, there wouldn't be so many DC tags in the American Plant(s) on River Road. Clearly people who voting with their pocketbook. While I loved having Johnsons's there, it wasn't the same store over the past 10 years in quality of customer service.

More vibrant upscale Millenial mini-units on top of another Five Guys and a CVS. Just what the neighborhood needs, especially after Cathedral Commons, Wegmans Town Center, GDS Harvard Square, etc. But you'll have to drive miles to the Maryland suburbs to buy a flat of plants or to get your shoes re-heeled.

[Anonymous]

Sick burn on most of New York City there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Can't you see this is a troll post? It's designed to trigger ward 3 anti-development folks.

I don't think it's a troll post. I think those with a hard-on for density are actually that dense.

They are.

How else do you explain them wanting to live in a human-scale anthill?

If you're not a student, are older than 30, earn a living, and are not single, you have no business living in a condo or apartment. It's just.... weird.

[Anonymous]

AU is tax exempt????? And charging these horrific rents????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AU is tax exempt????? And charging these horrific rents????

Is there a problem with tax-exempt organizations being property owners and making money? Harvard is worth, what, close to $38 billion.

[Anonymous]

To start building on and around Upper Wisconsin NOW is a little late to the game, what with many closer in places exploding. Does anyone besides me remember when all the large buildings went up on Connecticut Avenue in the late 79s, early 80s? It took 20 years before the early buyer could onload those things and recoup their costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AU is tax exempt????? And charging these horrific rents????

This is news?????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AU is tax exempt????? And charging these horrific rents????

Is there a problem with tax-exempt organizations being property owners and making money? Harvard is worth, what, close to $38 billion.

AU has to pay taxes on their commercial properties just like everyone else. They are only exempt if the usage is integral to their tax exempt mission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all sounds good, but here's the "money shot" quote:

While acknowledging that Johnson’s has been a
valued tenant and the neighboring community benefits from Johnson’s
services, our fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of limited
University resources dictated that we could not agree to an arrangement
with terms substantially below market value for the location.

A plant nursery just isn't going to be able to pay as much in rent as another yet national bank branch or a chain restaurant, and certainly won't offer to same real estate 'market value' potetnial as dense redevelopment into more "Generica" mixed-use. But in the process, we lose essential neighborhood-serving businesses on which the community has depended for a long time. As a tax-exempt organization that benefits from paying virtually no local taxes, AU should also consider its stewardship responsibilities in the community, rather than imagining itself as a wannabe hedge fund portfolio manager.

I disagree. Having Johnson's was not the best use of the space and it certainly shouldn't be up to AU to subsidize Johnson's business model. I would be disappointed if they get a bank branch or some other crappy tenant, but it certainly doesn't sound like that is the intention.

If Johnson's were so vital to the neighborhood and so supported, there wouldn't be so many DC tags in the American Plant(s) on River Road. Clearly people who voting with their pocketbook. While I loved having Johnsons's there, it wasn't the same store over the past 10 years in quality of customer service.

More vibrant upscale Millenial mini-units on top of another Five Guys and a CVS. Just what the neighborhood needs, especially after Cathedral Commons, Wegmans Town Center, GDS Harvard Square, etc. But you'll have to drive miles to the Maryland suburbs to buy a flat of plants or to get your shoes re-heeled.

Is there really something illogical about having to drive a mile to the American Plant Center on River Rd for something that most people buy once or twice a year? We go to CVS 2-3 times a week. We also eat out a couple of times a week. Garden supplies we get infrequently. I'm really having a hard time getting my head around the central grievance here - that peoples lives are ruined because they have to travel a short distance for something they only very rarely need to buy. Or am I missing something? I'm certainly not going to miss Johnson's and we did actually shop there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To start building on and around Upper Wisconsin NOW is a little late to the game, what with many closer in places exploding. Does anyone besides me remember when all the large buildings went up on Connecticut Avenue in the late 79s, early 80s? It took 20 years before the early buyer could onload those things and recoup their costs.

What large buildings went up on Connecticut Ave in the late 70's and early 80's? There are almost no buildings from that era on CT Ave so please enlighten us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all sounds good, but here's the "money shot" quote:

While acknowledging that Johnson’s has been a
valued tenant and the neighboring community benefits from Johnson’s
services, our fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of limited
University resources dictated that we could not agree to an arrangement
with terms substantially below market value for the location.

A plant nursery just isn't going to be able to pay as much in rent as another yet national bank branch or a chain restaurant, and certainly won't offer to same real estate 'market value' potetnial as dense redevelopment into more "Generica" mixed-use. But in the process, we lose essential neighborhood-serving businesses on which the community has depended for a long time. As a tax-exempt organization that benefits from paying virtually no local taxes, AU should also consider its stewardship responsibilities in the community, rather than imagining itself as a wannabe hedge fund portfolio manager.

I disagree. Having Johnson's was not the best use of the space and it certainly shouldn't be up to AU to subsidize Johnson's business model. I would be disappointed if they get a bank branch or some other crappy tenant, but it certainly doesn't sound like that is the intention.

If Johnson's were so vital to the neighborhood and so supported, there wouldn't be so many DC tags in the American Plant(s) on River Road. Clearly people who voting with their pocketbook. While I loved having Johnsons's there, it wasn't the same store over the past 10 years in quality of customer service.

More vibrant upscale Millenial mini-units on top of another Five Guys and a CVS. Just what the neighborhood needs, especially after Cathedral Commons, Wegmans Town Center, GDS Harvard Square, etc. But you'll have to drive miles to the Maryland suburbs to buy a flat of plants or to get your shoes re-heeled.

Is there really something illogical about having to drive a mile to the American Plant Center on River Rd for something that most people buy once or twice a year? We go to CVS 2-3 times a week. We also eat out a couple of times a week. Garden supplies we get infrequently. I'm really having a hard time getting my head around the central grievance here - that peoples lives are ruined because they have to travel a short distance for something they only very rarely need to buy. Or am I missing something? I'm certainly not going to miss Johnson's and we did actually shop there.

Agreed. Replace it with a hardware store! We need more of those.

Long live Strosniders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, both areas are frequented and supported by the same community. And there are two restaurants doing well in 'low density" New Mexico Ave. practically on Au's doorstep (and the mall is owned by them). Not sure why Tenleytown is getting no love/appreciation from AU. Their AU bus rolls through constantly all day. Perhaps that should be looked at. Would be good for the students to walk more.

It is unclear what point you are trying to make (a recurring theme in this awful thread) but no Tenleytown and Cathedral Commons are not at all the same area even if they are on the same corridor.

If you drive everywhere they may seem like the same place to you.

But the many students in the neighborhood at Wilson, AU and to a lesser extend GDS and Sidwell do not in fact drive everywhere nor do they have unlimited time to get food. And the AU shuttle bus does not serve Cathedral Commons nor is Cathedral Commons near a Metro station.

So yes they are distinct areas for those populations that aren't driving everywhere - I get that you live in Ward 3 and don't understand that some people have different means of getting around but the fact is that not everyone gets in their car for every thing they do and that includes people in your demographic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It all sounds good, but here's the "money shot" quote:

While acknowledging that Johnson’s has been a
valued tenant and the neighboring community benefits from Johnson’s
services, our fiduciary responsibility to be good stewards of limited
University resources dictated that we could not agree to an arrangement
with terms substantially below market value for the location.

A plant nursery just isn't going to be able to pay as much in rent as another yet national bank branch or a chain restaurant, and certainly won't offer to same real estate 'market value' potetnial as dense redevelopment into more "Generica" mixed-use. But in the process, we lose essential neighborhood-serving businesses on which the community has depended for a long time. As a tax-exempt organization that benefits from paying virtually no local taxes, AU should also consider its stewardship responsibilities in the community, rather than imagining itself as a wannabe hedge fund portfolio manager.

I agree. Losing the kinds of services and resources in the neighborhood that can't manage high rent, like nursery, diminishes the community. We don't need more chains.

Well Johnson's actually is a chain! And in fact a lot of the places to eat along Upper Wisconsin in fact are part of local chains - Guapos, Beefsteak, BTS, District Taco, Angelico, Z Burger, Muncheez are all part of local chains. Even Masala Art has more than 1 location. Just like Johnson's. The community has not been diminished by losing a Johnson's - and I say that as a long time customer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ita. The community has been very supportive of all of AU expansion. It's a betrayal. I hope the tenley/Wesley crowd fight every new dorm proposal, go after them for maintaining /beautifying public space and their sidewalks, and fight their bus rumbling through and polluting Tenleytown every 15 min.

OMG this maybe the craziest post yet on here - the "community" has most certainly not been supportive of AU's expansion! If you pay attention to things you will notice that several of the folks who turned out to protest the Johnson's closing have been long time critics of AU.

And in one of the many inanities of the never ending process the people who fought AU building more on campus housing (on a surface parking lot no less) are the same people who complain about students living off campus! The activist crowd (which is actually made up of about 5 people with lots of time on their hands) in fact has been fighting the proposal to build more dorms even though it reduces the need for AU students to have cars or transit the neighborhood or live off campus - but don't look for any sort of rational thinking or philosophy from these geriatric nut jobs.

And you are an idiot if you are complaining about the AU shuttle bus which moves a massive number of people every day for free and helps to keep cars off the road - you seem like someone more scared about public transit than educated about it but if you have any awareness of what goes on in the neighborhood you'd be aware that anyone can ride the AU shuttle for free - its a reliable way to get from campus to the Metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Can't you see this is a troll post? It's designed to trigger ward 3 anti-development folks.

I don't think it's a troll post. I think those with a hard-on for density are actually that dense.

They are.

How else do you explain them wanting to live in a human-scale anthill?

If you're not a student, are older than 30, earn a living, and are not single, you have no business living in a condo or apartment. It's just.... weird.

Again what does Johnson's closing have to do with density? Its as if you have some vague notion that things might change in the neighborhood at some point and you naturally conflate density with societies ills and are immediately paranoid that you won't be able to drive everywhere in the neighborhood as you've been doing all your life.

Have you been in an AU Park Colonial or a new build condo? They aren't as different as you think they are size wise.

In any case no one is forcing you to move into a "human-scale anthill" though based on the market it appears lots of people are interested in doing so.

But god forbid any of those folks live in our neighborhood!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start building on and around Upper Wisconsin NOW is a little late to the game, what with many closer in places exploding. Does anyone besides me remember when all the large buildings went up on Connecticut Avenue in the late 79s, early 80s? It took 20 years before the early buyer could onload those things and recoup their costs.

What large buildings went up on Connecticut Ave in the late 70's and early 80's? There are almost no buildings from that era on CT Ave so please enlighten us.

The ugly heavy square ones around Van Ness and paying further north.