Reply to Big GDS news

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Big GDS news"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Again, the neighborhood folks whining about GDS purchase and plans only have themselves to blame.  They opposed Safeway's proposal - the Safeway folks probably knew how long the CPCA dug their heels in on the CP Giant and bet that taking GDS' money was the better bet.  Ask the neighbors in Berkley, east of Foxhall between W and Reservoir.  They could've had a mayor's mansion on a huge parcel of relatively undeveloped land, but now they have a new traffic light and 46 houses. [/quote]

Your characterizing of the CP Giant history is completely wrong.  In 1998-2000, Giant proposed to raze the old supermarket and build a new, large one.  The local citizens association did oppose the design on the ground that it presented a black wall to Wisconsin Avenue roughly from Newark St. to Cactus Cantina.  (Think of the Giant on Arlington Rd. which unfortunately presents a dead zone toward vibrant Bethesda Row, instead facingits interior parking lot.)  In any event, Giant pulled its proposal because it was being acquired by Ahold and Ahold's focus soon turned to other matters, like an SEC investigation into its acquisitions.  In 2002-2003, however, the ANC and various other local groups, together with the city, entered into an agreement with Giant where Giant would build a modern store, with entrances on Wisconsin Ave oriented to pedestrians and a design that the groups supported.  Indeed, the ANC at its own expense hired an architect to work with Giant on a new pedestrian-focused design.  Mayor Williams, in fact, issued a press release on how it was an example of a developer and the community working successfully together.   However, Giant/Ahold later just walked away from the agreement.

By 2006, they were back, with a much larger, more ambitious plan that encompassed nearly two whole blocks.  While there was concern about Giant's good faith in backing away from the earlier agreement, various community groups engaged with Giant and were pretty pleased with Giant's plan, which included relatively few entrances and exits for vehicles to mitigate traffic impact around 70 housing units and a building between Idaho and Newark around 3 stories in height that was set back to preserve light and views.  Perhaps emboldened by the community's positive reaction to their 2006 plan, Giant then  pulled this proposal also.  When they came back, they had added more vehicle access points, thus creating new traffic patterns, doubled the proposed number of  housing units and doubled the height and mass of the north building.  While most development proposals start big and then are trimmed, Giant stated modestly and pretty thoughtfully but then got greedy.  Neighborhood groups became concerned about traffic and parking impacts and the fact that Giant's project had grown so large that it even required changes to the zoning to allow it to go forward.   By then Harriet Tregoning has taken over the Planning Office with her aggressive pro-development agenda, and her office's position swung from one of neutral planning analyst to cheerleader for the super-sized Cathedral Commons.  There is other speculation that some pay to play was involved, but in any event the plans sailed through the zoning board with barely a window changed.  Those who follow large development plans know how very unusual that is.  Even the commission staff was surprised.

It is what it is, and the neighborhood will have to live with it.  But it is a total canard to characterize the CP neighborhood position as one of digging in its heels.  Several times the community engaged Giant to build a better store and a balanced proposal, reaching agreement only to have Giant change its mind, walk away in bad faith and then get greedy.  [/quote]

How does your view square with this?  http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/2449/cpca-board-postpones-election-amid-campaign-for-change/[/quote]

First of all, consider the source:  GGW is part of the so-called "smart growth" development lobby echo chamber.  But what the piece describes is how the CPCA testified for changes in Giant's final proposal submitted to the zoning commission.  CPCA had supported two prior designs (indeed it was a party to the 2003 agreement for Giant to build a new store and favored the 2006 design as well).  A group called AWARE, in coordination with the developer group Ward 3 Vision, tried to take over CPCA because Giant was concerned that as a party to the 2003 agreement, CPCA might still have legal rights to enfore it.  After a vocal campaign in which many new members joined CPCA, the Aware/pro-"smart growth" slate lost by a substantial margin, to a slate that favored more balanced, "intelligent" growth that respects Cleveland Park's historic village in the city character.  Unfortunately by this time the zoning commission had already approved Cathedral Commons anyway.  [/quote]

You don't even bother to address the undemocratic postponement of the election, which was the final nail in the coffin of CPCA's claim to speak for CP. Sigh.[/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