Anonymous wrote:So, you don't think there will be commercial development associated with GDS? Dream on.

Tenleytown is getting the worst of all worlds. An expanded school, no grocery store and high density mixed-use.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Giant project was blocked because wealthy people on Newark Street didn't want more traffic. BOTTOM LINE. A very small handful of rich, connected folks blocked the project. They wrap themselves in the mantle of greenish, liberal, progressive mantle, but they are just rich people trying to keep the status quo. Blocking relatively affordable housing, expanded retail and opportunity. I live in the neighborhood. I am a greenish liberal too. But all this talk about concerns about design is bull. They used design to block progress.

This is ironic because the development design is frankly pretty bad. The tall building in particular with its windows looks like some anywhere airport hotel. The design seems cheap, of mediocre quality at best and does not relate at all to the surroundings (including being located across the street from an historic district). In that sense, it's a perfect fit with Giant, the anchor of the project. By contrast, take a look at the quality design and detail of the apartments going up next to the Wardman Marriiott or the corner building at Bethesda Row. The Office of Planning and the DC zoning board rushed Cathedral Commons through (there's lots of back-channel speculation on why), and gave not a whit of consideration to design issues. Now it shows.

Maybe there would not have been the rush to push through if CPCA had not obstructed for over a decade....

Apparently it was rushed through on orders of the mayor's office. The speculation is that Giant had demanded unconditional approval of Cathedral Commons as a quid pro quo for opening one or more stores in some challenging parts of town. Other speculation was that pay to play lubricated the way. The fact was that some commission staff in an aside said they had never seen such a pre-wired process for a major PUD project.

12 years o deliberation ain't enough? C'mon. This is why nobody want ps to build another store up in Tenleytown. That's why a school is going in there. A handful of people know what's best for entire neighborhoods? The people who oppose are generally, in my view, just as selfish and self interested as the developers.

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I had followed the Cathedral Commons develoment since it was first proposed and this is the very first time I have heard this.

Not sure I believe it, as the different controls and layers of government necessary for this make it seem implausible, particularly given the make-up of the Zoning Commission (2 federal 3 local including Anthony Hood, who is about as anti-development as it gets).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Giant project was blocked because wealthy people on Newark Street didn't want more traffic. BOTTOM LINE. A very small handful of rich, connected folks blocked the project. They wrap themselves in the mantle of greenish, liberal, progressive mantle, but they are just rich people trying to keep the status quo. Blocking relatively affordable housing, expanded retail and opportunity. I live in the neighborhood. I am a greenish liberal too. But all this talk about concerns about design is bull. They used design to block progress.

This is ironic because the development design is frankly pretty bad. The tall building in particular with its windows looks like some anywhere airport hotel. The design seems cheap, of mediocre quality at best and does not relate at all to the surroundings (including being located across the street from an historic district). In that sense, it's a perfect fit with Giant, the anchor of the project. By contrast, take a look at the quality design and detail of the apartments going up next to the Wardman Marriiott or the corner building at Bethesda Row. The Office of Planning and the DC zoning board rushed Cathedral Commons through (there's lots of back-channel speculation on why), and gave not a whit of consideration to design issues. Now it shows.

Maybe there would not have been the rush to push through if CPCA had not obstructed for over a decade....

Apparently it was rushed through on orders of the mayor's office. The speculation is that Giant had demanded unconditional approval of Cathedral Commons as a quid pro quo for opening one or more stores in some challenging parts of town. Other speculation was that pay to play lubricated the way. The fact was that some commission staff in an aside said they had never seen such a pre-wired process for a major PUD project.

Anonymous wrote:GDS should agree to dedicate the current lower school campus to DC for use as a charter school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Giant project was blocked because wealthy people on Newark Street didn't want more traffic. BOTTOM LINE. A very small handful of rich, connected folks blocked the project. They wrap themselves in the mantle of greenish, liberal, progressive mantle, but they are just rich people trying to keep the status quo. Blocking relatively affordable housing, expanded retail and opportunity. I live in the neighborhood. I am a greenish liberal too. But all this talk about concerns about design is bull. They used design to block progress.

This is ironic because the development design is frankly pretty bad. The tall building in particular with its windows looks like some anywhere airport hotel. The design seems cheap, of mediocre quality at best and does not relate at all to the surroundings (including being located across the street from an historic district). In that sense, it's a perfect fit with Giant, the anchor of the project. By contrast, take a look at the quality design and detail of the apartments going up next to the Wardman Marriiott or the corner building at Bethesda Row. The Office of Planning and the DC zoning board rushed Cathedral Commons through (there's lots of back-channel speculation on why), and gave not a whit of consideration to design issues. Now it shows.

Maybe there would not have been the rush to push through if CPCA had not obstructed for over a decade....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Giant project was blocked because wealthy people on Newark Street didn't want more traffic. BOTTOM LINE. A very small handful of rich, connected folks blocked the project. They wrap themselves in the mantle of greenish, liberal, progressive mantle, but they are just rich people trying to keep the status quo. Blocking relatively affordable housing, expanded retail and opportunity. I live in the neighborhood. I am a greenish liberal too. But all this talk about concerns about design is bull. They used design to block progress.

This is ironic because the development design is frankly pretty bad. The tall building in particular with its windows looks like some anywhere airport hotel. The design seems cheap, of mediocre quality at best and does not relate at all to the surroundings (including being located across the street from an historic district). In that sense, it's a perfect fit with Giant, the anchor of the project. By contrast, take a look at the quality design and detail of the apartments going up next to the Wardman Marriiott or the corner building at Bethesda Row. The Office of Planning and the DC zoning board rushed Cathedral Commons through (there's lots of back-channel speculation on why), and gave not a whit of consideration to design issues. Now it shows.

Anonymous wrote:The Giant project was blocked because wealthy people on Newark Street didn't want more traffic. BOTTOM LINE. A very small handful of rich, connected folks blocked the project. They wrap themselves in the mantle of greenish, liberal, progressive mantle, but they are just rich people trying to keep the status quo. Blocking relatively affordable housing, expanded retail and opportunity. I live in the neighborhood. I am a greenish liberal too. But all this talk about concerns about design is bull. They used design to block progress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The neighborhood is going to have a lot easier time negotiating with a school than it will with Safeway. It was a good move for everyone.

So GDS will give us back a full-size grocery store on that site?

No. Maybe a cafeteria though.

If Safeway sold, it's highly unlikely another store would come in. There is a lot more competition now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The neighborhood is going to have a lot easier time negotiating with a school than it will with Safeway. It was a good move for everyone.

So GDS will give us back a full-size grocery store on that site?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The neighborhood is going to have a lot easier time negotiating with a school than it will with Safeway. It was a good move for everyone.

So GDS will give us back a full-size grocery store on that site?