Anonymous wrote:The school could sell the Safeway lot to a developer to put residential on the residentially-zoned plots and commercial on the commercial plots. Smart growth groups should pressure GDS to do so instead of applauding this massive loss of housing and tax revenue. Matter of right development at both sites would produce much more tax revenue and housing for the District. But you can continue to support this bad project because GDS shill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

If a private developer had bought both the Safeway parcel and the Martens lot, then yes, you would have an argument. However, the school bought the property, so unless they sell the whole thing, we are left with maximizing the part that won't be the school.

But, [b]you can continue to fight the school because NIMBY.

Anonymous wrote:The school could sell the Safeway lot to a developer to put residential on the residentially-zoned plots and commercial on the commercial plots. Smart growth groups should pressure GDS to do so instead of applauding this massive loss of housing and tax revenue. Matter of right development at both sites would produce much more tax revenue and housing for the District. But you can continue to support this bad project because GDS shill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Yes, the school could do that and I suspect Smart Growth groups would welcome the additional housing. However, I don't think Smart Growth groups are in a position to pressure a property owner to do anything like what you suggest.




Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

If a private developer had bought both the Safeway parcel and the Martens lot, then yes, you would have an argument. However, the school bought the property, so unless they sell the whole thing, we are left with maximizing the part that won't be the school.

But, [b]you can continue to fight the school because NIMBY.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

If a private developer had bought both the Safeway parcel and the Martens lot, then yes, you would have an argument. However, the school bought the property, so unless they sell the whole thing, we are left with maximizing the part that won't be the school.

But, [b]you can continue to fight the school because NIMBY.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Currently there is a big empty grocery store, a bike shop and a used car dealer.

Replace that with the high value private school expansion, 200 new housing units (with related income, property and sales tax) and 75,000 square feet of high value retail and voila, more revenue to the city, higher property taxes around the school and more amenities in the neighborhood.

Not everyone sees this as a negative.

What exactly is a "high value private school expansion"? It sounds good, but seems to be one of those empty calories expressions -- i.e., meaningless.

Some people actually want to buy a house near a school where their kid attends. Besides, I don't see housing values hurting near Maret, Sidwell, St Albans, St Patricks, NPC, St Johns or NCS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

1. Dense mixed use in proximity to existing residential areas can also lead to lower property values because of traffic, parking and other external costs imposed on the neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Currently there is a big empty grocery store, a bike shop and a used car dealer.

Replace that with the high value private school expansion, 200 new housing units (with related income, property and sales tax) and 75,000 square feet of high value retail and voila, more revenue to the city, higher property taxes around the school and more amenities in the neighborhood.

Not everyone sees this as a negative.

What exactly is a "high value private school expansion"? It sounds good, but seems to be one of those empty calories expressions -- i.e., meaningless.

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

Anonymous wrote:Very important distinction. The harm of this project will be both to DC generally and Tenleytown specifically. A large swath of land that could be used for dense mixed-use development, creating hundreds of new homes for residents in Tenleytown, millions of dollars of tax revenue directly, and more through enhanced valuations of surrounding properties, is instead being devoted to a private school. Greater Greater Washington should get on this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

Anonymous wrote:Currently there is a big empty grocery store, a bike shop and a used car dealer.

Replace that with the high value private school expansion, 200 new housing units (with related income, property and sales tax) and 75,000 square feet of high value retail and voila, more revenue to the city, higher property taxes around the school and more amenities in the neighborhood.

Not everyone sees this as a negative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Except that wasn't the post that prompted the comment. This one was: "By putting a school on a valuable commercial lot, the school will actually take tax revenue and vibrancy away from Tenleytown."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."

Anonymous wrote:Currently there is a big empty grocery store, a bike shop and a used car dealer.

Replace that with the high value private school expansion, 200 new housing units (with related income, property and sales tax) and 75,000 square feet of high value retail and voila, more revenue to the city, higher property taxes around the school and more amenities in the neighborhood.

Not everyone sees this as a negative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tenleytown doesn't get tax revenue. It all goes to DC.

reading is so hard. So many words, so many letters and stuff:

"[B]ring desired vibrancy and renewal to Tenleytown and needed tax revenue and housing to DC."