Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
No, not really relevant. The area is zoned for Hearst, not Eaton or Janney; the orientation will be the Tenleytown metro and Tenleytown businesses, just as it is for most of the people who live on the north end of McLean Gardens. There will be almost no residential parking impact, given the parking being built on site for both residents and the businesses on site. As it is, parking at Mclean Gardens is very tight, and that was made clear to the developers who responded in kind. The "one mile" in this case is to the Tenley metro, not the Cleveland Park metro.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the world doesn't revolve around Cleveland Park.
The development will turn Wisconsin Ave from Porter St to Van Ness St into a 16-hour-a-day cluster f. The addition of a third traffic light (to be used by big rig delivery trucks) between Rodman and the post office will create gridlock, particularly on school days when Sidwell is in session. The developer itself proposed removing street parking from Wisconsin Ave. between Rodman and Tilden during non-rush hours, so yes, there's parking impact right there.
How many truck per day will be using that egress? 4? 50?
That stretch of Wisconsin Avenue is already a cluster most daylight hours, the addition of this development isn't going to make it worse. If anything, it will provide another destination for people in the neighborhood to walk to. If more people walk to get groceries etc, then they won't be driving, so it is entirely possible that local traffic will actually improve. Who knows? Neither you nor I, so claiming doom and gloom for every development gets old. Cathedral Commons was going to be the end of Cleveland Park. To this day, parking in the neighborhood is as easy as it ever was, and Cathedral Commons is a non-issue.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
No, not really relevant. The area is zoned for Hearst, not Eaton or Janney; the orientation will be the Tenleytown metro and Tenleytown businesses, just as it is for most of the people who live on the north end of McLean Gardens. There will be almost no residential parking impact, given the parking being built on site for both residents and the businesses on site. As it is, parking at Mclean Gardens is very tight, and that was made clear to the developers who responded in kind. The "one mile" in this case is to the Tenley metro, not the Cleveland Park metro.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the world doesn't revolve around Cleveland Park.
The development will turn Wisconsin Ave from Porter St to Van Ness St into a 16-hour-a-day cluster f. The addition of a third traffic light (to be used by big rig delivery trucks) between Rodman and the post office will create gridlock, particularly on school days when Sidwell is in session. The developer itself proposed removing street parking from Wisconsin Ave. between Rodman and Tilden during non-rush hours, so yes, there's parking impact right there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:2,000 at Fannie Mae? Ugh. Cheh needs to cool it.
It is essentially a matter of right project. Cheh has nothing to do with it.
She has lots to do with the overall vision for Ward 3. She should be keeping tabs on things and lnforming and looking out for her constituents. If there is rampant overdevelopment on her watch, she's accountable.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:2,000 at Fannie Mae? Ugh. Cheh needs to cool it.
It is essentially a matter of right project. Cheh has nothing to do with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cleveland Park was built exactly for what it was zoned for. It wasn't zoned to be any more dense than that. If you wanted it to be more dense, then city-wide zoning laws needed to have been changed.
Zoning code was developed in 1958. It conformed to what was built in Cleveland Park in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
At this point, it is a historic district and cannot transform. But it is a waste of billions of dollars of regional investment not to have a few more people able to live on top of a metro station.
You realize this causes both development of greenfields "out there" as well as artificailly increased housing prices in the District, right?
You realize that there are almost 2000 new housing units already under permit but not yet constructed within a one-mile radius of the Cleveland Park Metro? And that doesn't include anything east of Rock Creek Park.
Fannie Mae on Wisconsin Avenue doesn't even qualify as Cleveland Park, and is a whole different neighborhood than the subject of this thread.
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
Bottom line, new residents at the former Fannie Mae site will be oriented to Tenleytown, not Cleveland Park.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
No, not really relevant. The area is zoned for Hearst, not Eaton or Janney; the orientation will be the Tenleytown metro and Tenleytown businesses, just as it is for most of the people who live on the north end of McLean Gardens. There will be almost no residential parking impact, given the parking being built on site for both residents and the businesses on site. As it is, parking at Mclean Gardens is very tight, and that was made clear to the developers who responded in kind. The "one mile" in this case is to the Tenley metro, not the Cleveland Park metro.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the world doesn't revolve around Cleveland Park.
The development will turn Wisconsin Ave from Porter St to Van Ness St into a 16-hour-a-day cluster f. The addition of a third traffic light (to be used by big rig delivery trucks) between Rodman and the post office will create gridlock, particularly on school days when Sidwell is in session. The developer itself proposed removing street parking from Wisconsin Ave. between Rodman and Tilden during non-rush hours, so yes, there's parking impact right there.
Anonymous wrote:
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cleveland Park was built exactly for what it was zoned for. It wasn't zoned to be any more dense than that. If you wanted it to be more dense, then city-wide zoning laws needed to have been changed.
Zoning code was developed in 1958. It conformed to what was built in Cleveland Park in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
At this point, it is a historic district and cannot transform. But it is a waste of billions of dollars of regional investment not to have a few more people able to live on top of a metro station.
You realize this causes both development of greenfields "out there" as well as artificailly increased housing prices in the District, right?
You realize that there are almost 2000 new housing units already under permit but not yet constructed within a one-mile radius of the Cleveland Park Metro? And that doesn't include anything east of Rock Creek Park.
Fannie Mae on Wisconsin Avenue doesn't even qualify as Cleveland Park, and is a whole different neighborhood than the subject of this thread.
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
Anonymous wrote:2,000 at Fannie Mae? Ugh. Cheh needs to cool it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cleveland Park was built exactly for what it was zoned for. It wasn't zoned to be any more dense than that. If you wanted it to be more dense, then city-wide zoning laws needed to have been changed.
Zoning code was developed in 1958. It conformed to what was built in Cleveland Park in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
At this point, it is a historic district and cannot transform. But it is a waste of billions of dollars of regional investment not to have a few more people able to live on top of a metro station.
You realize this causes both development of greenfields "out there" as well as artificailly increased housing prices in the District, right?
You realize that there are almost 2000 new housing units already under permit but not yet constructed within a one-mile radius of the Cleveland Park Metro? And that doesn't include anything east of Rock Creek Park.
Fannie Mae on Wisconsin Avenue doesn't even qualify as Cleveland Park, and is a whole different neighborhood than the subject of this thread.
From the standpoint of economic development and transit use, it's very relevant. The Deputy Mayor for Economic Development uses a one-mile radius in its studies, including the one that it did in the last two years on Cleveland Park. One mile to a Metro development is considered "transit accessible" from a zoning perspective. 2000 new housing units within the Cleveland Park area will add a significant number of potential users for transit and customers for local restaurants and other businesses. At the same time, there will be clear traffic, parking and school enrollment impacts locally.
In any event, given real estate submarkets and very different demand curves, it is highly doubtful that upscale condos and flats are fungible with townhouses and SFHs on Germantown "greenfields."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cleveland Park was built exactly for what it was zoned for. It wasn't zoned to be any more dense than that. If you wanted it to be more dense, then city-wide zoning laws needed to have been changed.
Zoning code was developed in 1958. It conformed to what was built in Cleveland Park in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
At this point, it is a historic district and cannot transform. But it is a waste of billions of dollars of regional investment not to have a few more people able to live on top of a metro station.
You realize this causes both development of greenfields "out there" as well as artificailly increased housing prices in the District, right?
You realize that there are almost 2000 new housing units already under permit but not yet constructed within a one-mile radius of the Cleveland Park Metro? And that doesn't include anything east of Rock Creek Park.
Fannie Mae on Wisconsin Avenue doesn't even qualify as Cleveland Park, and is a whole different neighborhood than the subject of this thread.