Clearly, there are interests on both sides. It was never in the best interests of the Apex owners to agree immediately. It was never in their best interests to not get a taxpayer subsidy. Developers want to make money, and the county and state want a better Purple Line station.
But residents and businesses in Bethesda have interests as well, and there are many concerns that have been squelched so far in the public debate.
If this unusual teardown is to occur, and be in the public's best interest, here are some of the conditions we should have in the agreement:
1. A new movie theater must be part of the agreement.
No ifs, ands, or buts. The most dangerous part of demolishing the Apex Building would be the loss of the Regal Cinemas, a major downtown economic engine for nearby restaurants and retail stores. A new multiplex in Towson, Maryland, is promising to draw 20,000 additional people to that town every weekend. That gives you some sense of the importance of a downtown theater anchor.
As I've said before, many restaurants offer a dinner-and-a-movie promotion. Furthermore, with new theaters (with significantly higher ticket prices than the Regal, it should be noted) opening in North Bethesda and White Flint, downtown Bethesda businesses would lose patrons to those, and the AMC Mazza Gallerie theater in Friendship Heights. For the first time yesterday, a county official, Planning Director Gwen Wright, acknowledged that Bethesda will indeed be in competition with White Flint.
There are really only two options. One is to stipulate that the new development include a multi-screen, mainstream cineplex. Alternatively, a new downtown site should be identified, and the agreement worked out between all property owners involved. The potential redevelopment of the square block defined by Wisconsin, Fairmont, Woodmont and Norfolk Avenues is just one possible location. Putting it in the Woodmont Triangle would certainly align with the current transformation underway there. Wherever it is, it would have to be a sizable site to hold a cineplex, and it should be in walking distance of Metro.
But it has to be done. We should all be alarmed that no one in position of power seems to be alarmed about the potential loss of the Regal Cinemas. No viable downtown in America lacks a movie theater showing mainstream, current releases. Knocking Bethesda down below Silver Spring, White Flint, Rockville, and Germantown is unacceptable. This is indeed a big deal.
2. Any county subsidy must be contingent on the theater and significant affordable housing being included.
If taxpayer money is going to be used, the new development had better deliver on affordable housing beyond the level current projects are required to. The building, which will eventually sit above 2 Metro stations, should be the maximum height allowed, and offer at least 20% affordable units.
3. Solve the Bethesda Row plaza problem.
The open space across from Mon Ami Gabi and the Landmark Bethesda Row Cinema has an uncertain future. This agreement should use whatever leverage the county has to start putting some definition to that future, as Councilmember Roger Berliner (D - District 1) has mentioned several times recently.
4. Prevent de facto privatization of public space.
Along with the public space on the Woodmont Avenue plaza, the new development should incorporate a similar gathering space to the one that currently exists, at the front corner of the Apex Building. While there could be room to negotiate on this if the new project will include the theater - obviously the top priority - we don't want the "new" Apex structure to be a sealed-off block for wealthy residents only. It would also seem that the transit station entrance facilities would call for such public space, anyway.
This is all only my opinion (with the exception of the economic importance of the theater, which seems beyond dispute on a factual basis), and I don't claim to speak for anyone else other than myself. I encourage any serious discussion or suggestions for additions/subtractions from this list in the Comments section below. Any agreement also needs to address the concerns of nearby residents and property owners, as well. I would just like to have a bit more added to the public discussion than what I'm hearing so far.
15 comments:
I agree with points #2-4, but not with the first one. For the county to require a movie theater in a new development would be to overstep the limits of their authority. The land is private and the owner should have every right to develop as they please within the zoning restrictions.
The affordable housing regulations provide incentives to private developers and the plaza issues are questions of good urban design. However, forcing the owners (who are already being bullied out of their building) to keep a movie theater which can relocate elsewhere as the market dictates is unnecessary government intrusion, and it's surprising to see that you would advocate this.
Disappointed in you Mr. Dyer. Now we're going to be requiring movie theaters in development projects because you think it will attract people to restaurants? I'd love to know how a mainstream movie theater will attract the major employers you promise in your campaign.
We need companies on their way to becoming F500 companies. Think Discovery Channel .. .they had offices all over Bethesda.
F500's spend all their time re-arranging the deckchairs, not creating real growth.
"The building, which will eventually sit above 2 Metro stations, should be the maximum height allowed, and offer at least 20% affordable units."
WHY? I live and pay a lot taxes for that "privledge" and don't want to subsidize others to live here. Bethesda is an upscale area, let those that can't afford to live here go to SP, or Rockville. That's also why I oppose the Purple Line. You think giving subsidizes for 20% housing increases the value of Bethesda, lowers crime, or makes Bethesda a more attractive community? Does Beverly Hils provide housing subsidizes/requirements? It just baffles me why people think this is a god-given right that we must offer affordable housing in Bethesda. The market is what the market is for a reason.
Nice comment, anon - way to prove Bethesda is as douchey and snobby as everyone thinks. God forbid BCC teachers or the district's police officers be able to live within 20 miles of Bethesda. You don't even want them to have public transportation access to Bethesda; that's how awful a person you are.
Anon @ 8:46 - Why haven't you moved to Beverly Hills? You so need to be there. They're longing for you to join them, I'm sure. Go and perfect your not yet perfect life immediately!
Meanwhile, back in reality with Dyer - Good points. Like you, I think Apex is one of Bethesda's better buildings and I'd hope that a multiplex is reborn if the rest of Apex is tossed. It's vital to fueling all the other businesses in Bethesda, esp. the restaurants. Beth Row can't do it all alone. Cheers.
The Regal is past it's prime. It was cutting edge in the 1990s when it was UA Bethesda.
They have updated the seating and made some other improvements.
I do agree on the need for a new multi plex. All of the great downtowns in MoCo has one (Rockville, Silver Spring, Kentlands, etc.)
A multiplex is key to having a vibrant night time economy that attracts all ages.
The population of downtown Bethesda is growing rapidly so will the need for a multi plex.
8:13 - I would agree with your point about the theater requirement under ordinary circumstances. Were there at least one other cineplex showing popular movies in town, the market could indeed dictate whether a new one was in demand or not.
In this case, however, we are talking about the only theater in town showing these films. And, based on the crowds, there is market demand.
But Regal, AMC, etc. don't get to act on that market demand alone in an expensive, high-density urban area. A developer with the space required for a modern cineplex needs to step forward. It is expensive square footage.
I can recall the days when Bethesda didn't have a cineplex, and you had to drive to Rockville, North Bethesda, or into the District to see the latest blockbuster movies.
There has always been demand for movies, but look how long it took the market to deliver Regal Cinemas to Bethesda.
The Regal Bethesda and Rockville theaters were major catalysts in the early period of the recent transformations of those downtown areas. Regal Bethesda 10 drew greater foot traffic, and created the demand for more restaurants.
What would restaurant and retail business owners do without a theater draw? How many will last, if the market itself - as I personally witnessed in the past - does not respond to our demand for movies? Can you imagine a successful, modern downtown that doesn't have a cineplex? And what about the claims that they are promoting walkability, and a destination for millenials? Forcing people to drive to faraway theaters, and demolishing one that draws millenials to live or spend money here today, would be total hypocrisy.
I don't remember any outcry when the Planning Board required a restaurant in the Woodmont View development. In this case, we are obstensibly allowing greater density in the new building, and putting public money into the deal. That's not a private development project anymore at that point. If they are getting public money, they should be addressing the public interest.
8:24 - It's a fact that Regal Cinemas attracts people who then dine at restaurants. Do you really believe we will have this many restaurants if we have no cineplex? Movie theaters are not the main draw for Fortune 500 companies. But attracting those, and sabotaging the local Bethesda economy are two different things.
8:39 - I strongly agree with your first point. As to Fortune 500s, I think it's important to consider that major corporations bring higher wages, benefits and job openings at many skill levels. You don't get that with a software start-up. Landing a Fortune 500 has a catalyst effect, as well. If other companies see action here, they'll want to look into our county, as well. Big companies also require more local services, dining, and put high-wage employees into the local economy, who spend money at local businesses.
I'd agree we need a GOOD cinema complex. The Regal however, is one of the worst I've ever been in, both in screen quality and audio bleed. They've long since seen the last dollar they'll ever pry out of my fingers. Granted, I'm pickier than the average viewer in that regard.
Space considerations (or lack thereof, would suggest a complex with a smaller number of theaters, which will be hard to justify from a large first-run chain. Since Landmark's Bethesda Row is nearby, the art-house circuit is accounted for.
This would have been a good location for ArcLight, but they chose the mall instead. Several of their California theaters are in neighborhoods very similar to downtown Bethesda, with similar parking constraints.
Landmark Bethesda Row and Regal Rockville are underground, so you don't necessarily need a lot of space at street level.
The Woodmont Triangle would be a great location for the new cineplex.
I think Bethesda Row is the better location of the two for it. Too little continuity in Woodmont Triangle. The Row is a destination itself.
That's part of my reasoning why it should go to the Woodmont Triangle...we need more destinations there.
The restaurants could use the traffic that a cinema would bring. They don't have as many offices as the central core of the downtown.
The one attraction that the Triangle has, the lmagination Stage, is fabulous, but doesn't activate the area at night.
Post a Comment