Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

What makes sense about a drive thru in an urban area with scarce land and traffic issues in a city that is committed to reducing its carbon footprint and being safer for pedestrians and cyclists?

Drive thrus save no time, lead to lots of lazy people sitting in their SUVs with the engines idling while blocking traffic and usually the sidewalk and the land use is really stupid too.

But this is America and everyone should be able to get 10 MPG in their suburban while waiting to buy an Egg McMuffin right?

If you cannot see how a drive through would be safer in COVID times, I cannot really help you. If you are driving a car that only gets 10 mpg, there are also larger issues and the person driving it should probably be given an award for saving a chunk of metal from the dump.

My cars gets a lot more than 10mpg and I end up going to the McDonald’s on River road with my Kids rather than the one on Wisconsin. About equidistant. Because it’s just easier especially now with covid. The McDonald’s on Wisconsin could easily be a nice drive through. Sometimes we even get our food and eat in the car.

LOL - we were coming back from a soccer game last weekend and the line for the drive-in on River Road was almost a block long.

So we parked, put on our masks and were in and out in under 5 minutes. The drive thru line cleared 2 cars in the time we were in and out.

Meanwhile you were being paranoid and doing your part to accelerate global warning.

So no you don't need to help me - you need to grow up and have some common sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

What makes sense about a drive thru in an urban area with scarce land and traffic issues in a city that is committed to reducing its carbon footprint and being safer for pedestrians and cyclists?

Drive thrus save no time, lead to lots of lazy people sitting in their SUVs with the engines idling while blocking traffic and usually the sidewalk and the land use is really stupid too.

But this is America and everyone should be able to get 10 MPG in their suburban while waiting to buy an Egg McMuffin right?

If you cannot see how a drive through would be safer in COVID times, I cannot really help you. If you are driving a car that only gets 10 mpg, there are also larger issues and the person driving it should probably be given an award for saving a chunk of metal from the dump.

My cars gets a lot more than 10mpg and I end up going to the McDonald’s on River road with my Kids rather than the one on Wisconsin. About equidistant. Because it’s just easier especially now with covid. The McDonald’s on Wisconsin could easily be a nice drive through. Sometimes we even get our food and eat in the car.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP: I don’t want to re-copy such long posts. I’m curious about what the PPs commenting on FH’s lack of density have in mind. Friendship Heights Village, on the MD side of Western, was probably the earliest example in the area of building a dense, high rise community that could take advantage of public transit options. Are those of you describing the lack of density in FH only talking about the DC side of the neighborhood? I have to say that one of the things that makes living in the area attractive is the mixed-density and the green spaces (thank you GEICO!) that balance out the high rises on the MD side.

FH, MD in fact is quite dense - denser than Manhattan actually though it is quite small (I think it is like 16 acres in total).

But it is very much car oriented density - all of the buildings are actually 4 story parking decks topped by 16 story residential buildings and all of the units have a lot of parking and are poorly connect to the street and it really isn't a lively or interesting place to walk. I would bet the DC side of the line generates more transit usage than the denser MD side.

But that may change as most of the buildings are condos that were built in the 70's and their residents skew heavily older - as those units turn over you may get different patterns of behavior and people who buy there to be within walking distance of the Metro.

THose "dense" buildings include Sunrise senior center and a bunch of de facto senior living buildings. Young people. young families are not living in those buildings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP: I don’t want to re-copy such long posts. I’m curious about what the PPs commenting on FH’s lack of density have in mind. Friendship Heights Village, on the MD side of Western, was probably the earliest example in the area of building a dense, high rise community that could take advantage of public transit options. Are those of you describing the lack of density in FH only talking about the DC side of the neighborhood? I have to say that one of the things that makes living in the area attractive is the mixed-density and the green spaces (thank you GEICO!) that balance out the high rises on the MD side.

FH, MD in fact is quite dense - denser than Manhattan actually though it is quite small (I think it is like 16 acres in total).

But it is very much car oriented density - all of the buildings are actually 4 story parking decks topped by 16 story residential buildings and all of the units have a lot of parking and are poorly connect to the street and it really isn't a lively or interesting place to walk. I would bet the DC side of the line generates more transit usage than the denser MD side.

But that may change as most of the buildings are condos that were built in the 70's and their residents skew heavily older - as those units turn over you may get different patterns of behavior and people who buy there to be within walking distance of the Metro.

THose "dense" buildings include Sunrise senior center and a bunch of de facto senior living buildings. Young people. young families are not living in those buildings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

What makes sense about a drive thru in an urban area with scarce land and traffic issues in a city that is committed to reducing its carbon footprint and being safer for pedestrians and cyclists?

Drive thrus save no time, lead to lots of lazy people sitting in their SUVs with the engines idling while blocking traffic and usually the sidewalk and the land use is really stupid too.

But this is America and everyone should be able to get 10 MPG in their suburban while waiting to buy an Egg McMuffin right?

If you cannot see how a drive through would be safer in COVID times, I cannot really help you. If you are driving a car that only gets 10 mpg, there are also larger issues and the person driving it should probably be given an award for saving a chunk of metal from the dump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

What makes sense about a drive thru in an urban area with scarce land and traffic issues in a city that is committed to reducing its carbon footprint and being safer for pedestrians and cyclists?

Drive thrus save no time, lead to lots of lazy people sitting in their SUVs with the engines idling while blocking traffic and usually the sidewalk and the land use is really stupid too.

But this is America and everyone should be able to get 10 MPG in their suburban while waiting to buy an Egg McMuffin right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget to factor in that landlords can write off a vacancy as a loss. That’s usually more valuable than renting for a reduced rate. They also use the rental rates to calculate the value of their buildings for refinancing—which they then use to build a new building somewhere else. If they base their business model on $100 a sqft but rent for $50, they’ve just reduced the overall value of their building.

You're looking at it on an accounting (accrual) basis, while ignoring cashflow.

If I have a building and owe $10k/month on the mortgage that I usually rent out for $20k, then choosing to bring in $0 instead of a reduced rent of $5k or $10k is going to drive me into bankruptcy cash-wise.

Now if you own the building outright, you're correct the loss may be worth it.

This doesn’t fully explain it. Because pre covid, commercial landlords loved them some empty buildings. And they loved to raise rents to kick out long standing stores to keep the buildings empty.


There’s a special place in hell for commercial landlords. I fear the covid will not teach them a lesson.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP: I don’t want to re-copy such long posts. I’m curious about what the PPs commenting on FH’s lack of density have in mind. Friendship Heights Village, on the MD side of Western, was probably the earliest example in the area of building a dense, high rise community that could take advantage of public transit options. Are those of you describing the lack of density in FH only talking about the DC side of the neighborhood? I have to say that one of the things that makes living in the area attractive is the mixed-density and the green spaces (thank you GEICO!) that balance out the high rises on the MD side.

FH, MD in fact is quite dense - denser than Manhattan actually though it is quite small (I think it is like 16 acres in total).

But it is very much car oriented density - all of the buildings are actually 4 story parking decks topped by 16 story residential buildings and all of the units have a lot of parking and are poorly connect to the street and it really isn't a lively or interesting place to walk. I would bet the DC side of the line generates more transit usage than the denser MD side.

But that may change as most of the buildings are condos that were built in the 70's and their residents skew heavily older - as those units turn over you may get different patterns of behavior and people who buy there to be within walking distance of the Metro.

THose "dense" buildings include Sunrise senior center and a bunch of de facto senior living buildings. Young people. young families are not living in those buildings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP: I don’t want to re-copy such long posts. I’m curious about what the PPs commenting on FH’s lack of density have in mind. Friendship Heights Village, on the MD side of Western, was probably the earliest example in the area of building a dense, high rise community that could take advantage of public transit options. Are those of you describing the lack of density in FH only talking about the DC side of the neighborhood? I have to say that one of the things that makes living in the area attractive is the mixed-density and the green spaces (thank you GEICO!) that balance out the high rises on the MD side.

FH, MD in fact is quite dense - denser than Manhattan actually though it is quite small (I think it is like 16 acres in total).

But it is very much car oriented density - all of the buildings are actually 4 story parking decks topped by 16 story residential buildings and all of the units have a lot of parking and are poorly connect to the street and it really isn't a lively or interesting place to walk. I would bet the DC side of the line generates more transit usage than the denser MD side.

But that may change as most of the buildings are condos that were built in the 70's and their residents skew heavily older - as those units turn over you may get different patterns of behavior and people who buy there to be within walking distance of the Metro.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Why the heck would the city prohibit new drive throughs? What a stupid rule. Drive throughs make a lot of sense. We need MORE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had no idea that drive throughs were illegal in DC.

Always wondered why the Wisconsin and Van Ness McDonalds did not have a drive through.

Umm...there are many drive throughs in DC. Van Ness Burger King on Connecticut - Popeys on Georgia Ave to start with...

Yup and the existing ones are grandfathered in - no new ones will be approved and that is a good thing. Having said that the Van Ness McDonalds has been around for a while and certainly could have gotten approved for a drive through at some point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then after Family housing is created they should lease to places like Jiffy Lube, dollar store, and gyms, karate studios, yoga studios. Starbucks with drive through coffee. Make it a place people can actually live.

People in this DC bubble love to hate their life.

I’d love to have these shops at friendship heights but they would not be able to afford the astronomical rents

Jiffy Lube and drive throughs and dollar stores in Friendship Heights? No thanks - I live in DC because I hate the suburbs but if I need to slum it can still go there.

Luckily DC has made new drive thrus illegal.

And otherwise your comment is weird - FH has 2 Starbucks and TT another and there are numerous Karate and Yoga studios.

Also the only type of housing that is available now on the DC side is "family housing" whatever that even means.

You live in DC because you hate the suburbs, but you choose to live in one of the most suburban parts of DC that is quite literally a stone's throw from the suburbs you profess to hate.

Sigh.

Friendship Heights is not suburban at all by most definitions nor is much of Ward 3.

It is a walkable neighborhood well served by multiple public transportation options and has an urban street grid and is within walking distance of multiple retail nodes.

While the DC side of the line is not very dense the MD side is actually quite dense though interestingly the opposite of urban in its design and layout and there are in fact parts of Ward 3 that are among the densest parts of the District.

So in fact FH is not Rockville or any number of other suburban hellscapes where it in fact is difficult to walk anywhere or take public transportation or where there is no density of any kind.

But nice try.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP: I don’t want to re-copy such long posts. I’m curious about what the PPs commenting on FH’s lack of density have in mind. Friendship Heights Village, on the MD side of Western, was probably the earliest example in the area of building a dense, high rise community that could take advantage of public transit options. Are those of you describing the lack of density in FH only talking about the DC side of the neighborhood? I have to say that one of the things that makes living in the area attractive is the mixed-density and the green spaces (thank you GEICO!) that balance out the high rises on the MD side.

The geico campus is a tragic waste of valuable land and a crime against planning. The gigantic surface parking lot would be better used as literally anything else including a jail, tannery, or slaughterhouse. At least those would bring jobs to the area!

In general I find the MD side very unpleasant not because of its high density, but because of its awful suburban street design. It should be a narrow street grid like the DC side.

The GEICO campus is a truly welcome oasis of green space for the people who live in an extremely dense area of high rises. I’ve lived in both Manhattan and FHV — and what makes it livable is the proximity to green spaces and low rise buildings like the GEICO campus — which, not incidentally, houses lots and lots of jobs.

I’m curious. PP: Where do you live? If you’re living in a SFH with your own yard, you might not fully appreciate what it’s like to be quarantined in an apartment, surrounded by other apartments, without a scrap of nature. Proximity to green space actually has health benefits, Unless you’re living next to a tannery, a jail, or a slaughterhouse yourself, you might like the standing for your - um - proposals.
I say this as someone who remembers the area west of Chelsea way before High Line. Animal carcasses swaying from hooks really is probably not a better use for a surface parking lot that at least provides visual relief and welcome space for the community, especially during weekends.

Then it is an oasis for people who don't know the neighborhood they claim to be living in.

The predominant feature of the Geico property is its large surface parking lots.

Of course if you live there then you should now that literally immediately adjacent to the Geico property is Brookdale park which has lots of mature trees, shade and an actual playground. And a block further west along Willard is the Willard Avenue Park which has trails, a creek, a basketball court and another playground!

And a couple of blocks further away across Western is Ft Bayard park.

So no the greenspace on the Geico property is really not of much utility if you know the neighborhood and environmentally it does nothing to make up for the much larger surface parking lots which are terrible for the environment.

PP: Yes, I know where these parks are. I also get to see the trees and lawns and fountains on the GEICO property from my apartment windows, and look forward to the days when it snows and neighborhood families bring their sleds to play on the GEICO hill.
I also appreciate the large surface parking lots where many teens get their first driving lessons and multiple community activities take place.

Wow! Different people in different circumstances with different resources appreciate different things. Who knew! Shrug