Reply to For the anti-development groups in Ward 3

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "For the anti-development groups in Ward 3"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares![/quote]

It's hard to respond to nonsensical and incomplete statements and cryptic references, but let's give it a try.

"So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in..."  Gee, I thought earlier postings on the thread blamed the all-powerful "wealthy" NIMBYs for wanting to keep out "poor" people.  Which is it, or will any ad hominem argument do?

"you'll take Babes."  You seem to refer to a proposed Planned Unit Development proposed on the site of the former Babes Billiards site in Tenleytown.  You left out the fact that DC approved a PUD at the same site several years ago, which had the strong backing of community groups.  The development was never built, and the new site owner let the previous permits expire.  Rather than resurrecting them, the new owner proposes something completely different with no off-street parking at all (something the previous, approved project had).  No one wants to "take Babes" but would like to see the earlier, permitted plan, which had the blessing of various stakeholders -- and enough parking -- finally built as approved.

"a Giant stuck in the 1920s."  Based on your references to Newark and Macomb Sts., you must mean the Cathedral Commons project between McLean Gardens and Cleveland Park.  (The Giant in fact dates from the 1950s.)  Another case of developer SNAFU/overreach.  Giant Realty reached agreement with the DC government and community groups in 2002/2003 to build a new, larger grocery store as a "matter of right" under zoning but never built what they agreed.   Then they pursued a different path, drastically up-sized the project which required exceeding the the zoning for the site -- and now apparently can't find financing for the project!   Meanwhile, Safeway built a new matter-of-right store in Georgetown while Giant fiddled, which is even LEED certified (the not-so-green-Giant doesn't plan to be).   And as for more traffic, Cathedral Commons' own projections filed with their application show a resulting 1000 more cars and trucks per day on Macomb, 400-500 more a day on Newark -- which seems like a pretty real increase on non-main-throughfare streets.   And they sought and got permission to build less off-street parking than what zoning required.  As the other poster wrote, unlike MoCo and Allington, DC always rolls over and pussies out when it comes to traffic mitigation and parking requirements.  And as for a higher tax base?  DC DOT now plans to widen Idaho Ave. and cut down the mature tree canopy so the the big trucks  can access Cathedral Commons -- all at taxpayer expense, not the developer's![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics