Reply to Cheh's Ward 3 ANC Gerrymandering

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Cheh's Ward 3 ANC Gerrymandering"

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][quote=Anonymous]What happened is not "gerrymandering"

The people who love closest to Wisconsin Avenue will now be part of an ANC that is focused on Wisconsin Avenue. That is the opposite of gerrymadering.

It never made sense that an ANC Commissioenr who lives across the street from the Cathedral had oversight of Connecticut Avenue.

The change fixes that to a degree. Now, the people who live closest to each corridor will have a say in what happens on those corridors. This is a good thing.[/quote]

Yes, but a person who lives directly across 34th Street from John Eaton and sends children there now has no say in what happens at John Eaton (or NCRC or Cleveland Park Club). Ditto for someone on the other side of 34th wrt Macomb Playground (or the Cathedral Schools or the Hearst pool). A neighborhood is more than its commercial boundaries. [/quote]

Don’t worry.  Cleveland Park Smart Growth and it’s partner Ward 3 Vision (Redistricting Tsar Ward is on the boards of both) will next turn their attention to making 34th Street a commercial, denser mixed-use corridor.[/quote]

Good. I wish there was at least a corner store nearby. Not sure why people get a veto on what their neighbor does with their own property. If they want to build a few apartments, why shouldn't they? It is their land.[/quote]

Have you tried walking a few blocks to Wisconsin or Connecticut? There already are tons of stores nearby. 
[/quote]
It’s crazy how lazy this person is that they seem incapable of walking 2 blocks. It’s also clear that they don’t live nearby or else they would understand the public health nuisance issue first hand. There is already a massive rat problem and attracting more rats closer to people homes just so one person doesn’t have to walk 2 blocks is bonkers.

Also, DC is “over stored”. If your desired goal is to keep the Wisconsin corridor vibrant, adding retail on 34th would be anathema. [/quote]

There’s likely to be a retail shake out once Wegmans opens.  For example, Wegmans’ retail offerings are so extensive that they can outcompete Giant on quality and even price for some items.  Wegmans and City Ridge are much better designed than Cathedral Commons a few blocks to the south, and people will want to spend time at City Ridge. Giant will struggle and it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s closed at that location in 5 years.  It would be a shame if it became a Dollar General or Planet Fitness, but it’s hard to see many customers sticking with Giant when Wegmans is so close by.[/quote]

Man, they should've built 10 stories of apartments on top of the Giant when they had the chance. I wonder why they didn't?

Luckily, Wegmans/City Ridge didn't make that mistake and didn't care about the complaints of nearby homeowners.[/quote]

Bozzuto and Giant should have hired real architects to design their project, the way City Ridge did.[/quote]

It sounds like nobody could stop city ridge, but the neighbors got an effective veto over Giant/Cathedral. I find it hilarious that everyone becomes an architectural critic at zoning meetings.[/quote]

Where was the “veto”?  Cathedral Commons went from application to ground breaking in less than 2 years.  A new store could have been built earlier, however.  In the early 2000s Giant signed an agreement with Mayor Williams’ administration and a local community organization to construct a new store but Giant then reneged on the agreement.

What’s interesting, as you point out, is that City Ridge was built more or less as matter of right (except that the Fannie building was landmarked).  Yet the overall design and public amenities (such as the Wisconsin green) are far superior to Cathedral Commons.  CC was built as a PUD.  Because Giant-Bozzuto sought a variance from zoning, that means that the PUD was supposed to contain offsetting public amenities.  Other PUDs have had parks, theater space, etc as public amenities.  The only thing of note that Cathedral Commons offered was a puny waterfall feature opposite the CVS.  Don’t try to look too hard for it.  The water feature was turned off several years ago and what was supposed to have been a public pocket space has been effectively privatized as outdoor restaurant space.  Park Van Ness, built by BF Saul, was another example of a matter of right development with superior design.  What seems clear is that some developers care about design and public amenities (and keeping their commitments), and others will throw up the cheapest design they can get away with.[/quote]

if the NIMBYs hadn't raised a ruckus, a new Giant could have opened in 2001 with a parking garage on the old surface parking lot and store front openings on Wisconsin Avenue. Why they fought that, protracted the project for 15 years and ended up with a multi-block development is beyond me.[/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