Reply to First Johnson's, now Sullivan's! Who is the landlord behind this?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "First Johnson's, now Sullivan's! Who is the landlord behind this? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

Wawa, CVS, FedEx, BB&T Bank, 7-11: None of which are in that mall. DCUSA also takes up a comically massive footprint in the neighborhood, complete with an always-empty parking garage, so writing it off as "one building" is putting lipstick on a pig. Your prized density has brought with it soulless, charmless retail that can be found anywhere else. The recipe is already being repeated in other "dense" neighborhoods.[/quote]

I don't understand why you keep referring to DC USA as an example of density. It's not. For one thing, it has a two-story underground parking garage with 1,000 spaces.[/quote]
It’s apparent you guys just make up definitions for words and concepts on the fly. [/quote]

"You guys" who?[/quote]
DC USA not being an example of density because it has underground parking is purely made up. [/quote]

Then could you please explain how it is an example of density?[/quote]
This is not debate club. You said it is not. And you made that up. You prove it or go away. [/quote]

Who made what up? Somebody kept referring to DCUSA as an example of density. Why? It's a suburban-style shopping mall development in a city.[/quote]

DCUSA is a Marion Barry-era attempt at economic development, and should be no one’s template for infill.  [b]But it is certainly density[/b], even if it is just retail and not housing.  I don’t understand the point that if a development has onsite parking that it is somehow not “density.”[/quote]

In what way is it density? Compared to what? A surface parking lot?[/quote]

It's much denser than what was there before, which was basically empty lots and burned-out buildings that had never really been restored after the riots in 1968. But not denser than what was there before then: http://www.streetsofwashington.com/2014/04/the-arcade-in-columbia-heights.html

At the time that project was set in motion, it may have been the only available option for economic development of a site that was way less desirable for business than it became not long after the building opened. I never particularly liked it, but the context in which it was developed is worth keeping in mind.[/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