Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A taco strip club would literally be better than what's there now.
All strip clubs have tacos available
Anonymous wrote:A taco strip club would literally be better than what's there now.
Anonymous wrote:A taco strip club would literally be better than what's there now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.
No, the difference is that some people see doom and gloom around 8 stories but not 6. Some people see the revenue benefits to the city with those extra income taxes that can help pay for pay raises to first responders or teachers. Some people see more patronage of local retail with those extra residents, creating more jobs and opportunities.
Others simply want to exclude anyone else from enjoying what they already have.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.
Anonymous wrote:Nobody's falling for the ancient history. We're talking about what people moved to this community for.
The simple matter is that what GDS wants is an outrageous land grab against what the objective Comprehensive Plan calls for now and they have to justify why we should give developers a big fat precedent to put 90' towers on every corner that is quite lovely without any chain retail.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.
You mean like Tenley Hill where all of the WAGGgroup.com people live? They are only fighting this to protect the views from their dwellings. Talk about hypocritical.
Aaahhh. That all makes sense now. I really couldn't understand why people were waxing poetic about the Martens and the Safeway.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.
You mean like Tenley Hill where all of the WAGGgroup.com people live? They are only fighting this to protect the views from their dwellings. Talk about hypocritical.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.
Anonymous wrote:Marion Barry cut a deal with the upper-caucasia in the mid-1980's to gain their vote in his first re-election bid. That is the short story as to why Wisconsin Avenue is underzoned, given it is a major street with high metro access.
Anonymous wrote:
It's a 33% increase in density over zoning, which is why it requires a PUD. That's a big deal. And guess what? If the higher building height is approved in a special process, then the next time a developer comes in and wants to bust zoning, he points to the extra height PUD as the neighborhood baseline. The difficulty for Big Development and their front organizations and partners is that people aren't as stupid as they would like to think.