Brookfield's plan for Bethesda Metro Center |
Commissioner compares
opponents to ICE agents
Developer Brookfield's sketch plan for its 4 Bethesda Metro Center project was unanimously approved by the Montgomery County Planning Board this afternoon. The plan met with stiff opposition from neighbor Clark Enterprises and a broad coalition of citizens. Email communications against the project easily overwhelmed those in support by about 80% to 20%, based on the compiled record provided by the Planning Department. But planning commissioners largely pushed back on opponents, with one bizarrely comparing residents to ICE agents who are "putting children in cages."
Much of the opposition centered on the question of whether the majority of open space should be facing Wisconsin Avenue, or wrap around the building as the Brookfield plan proposes. Brookfield's plan does include a fair amount of public space in front of the tower, which they refer to as the Metro Commons. It also creates a promenade alongside the 290' residential building the developer compares favorably with Bethesda Lane at Bethesda Row. Behind at a rear corner will be a lawn and programmed gathering space, that will include art exhibits directed by Arts Brookfield, the entity Brookfield operates arts programs through in several major cities around the world.
Proponents of Brookfield's plan included Bethesda resident Amelia Ciriani, who called it "just what we need for Bethesda Metro Center. I absolutely love the idea." "Bethesda should be so lucky as to have Brookfield program this space," transit activist Tina Slater testified, referring to Arts Brookfield.
Mary Jo Peebles of Bethesda urged commissioners to deny approval of the plan, calling for more study to consider "what it feels like to walk the streets" around such developments. Like many speaking in opposition, she referred to the 3-D models of the Metro Center on display on the table before her, which were prepared by former Montgomery County Planning Director Richard Tustian. Tustian also provided thorough testimony in opposition to the project, asking commissioners to deny the application, and "initiate alternative design studies."
Richard Tustian's 3-D model #1 |
The models, silently but prominently displayed, subversively tweaked those who argue such three-dimensional renderings cannot be provided by developers, as Tustian assembled these relatively quickly at home. They had a strong impact on the conversation. "Oh my golly, that's horrible," one resident said after examining the 3-D version of what the plaza will look like with Brookfield's plan. On the other side, one Brookfield proponent objected to having to testify with the models in front of her.
Tustian's second model, showing a larger plaza facing Wisconsin Avenue |
Bethesda resident Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an environmental scientist whose career included 18 years at the EPA, said downtown Bethesda is "rapidly becoming a concrete jungle." She spoke in opposition to Brookfield's plan, and called for more open space at the Metro Center plaza. "Democracy depends on the ability of citizens to find open space, safe space, where they can talk, organize and share ideas," she said.
Despite the strong opposition on display before and during the hearing, commissioners dismissed the opponents and voted to approve the plan. If that wasn't enough reminder of why term limits passed overwhelmingly in 2016, Commissioner Natali Fani-González took the nose-thumbing one bizarre step further, comparing opponents who called on her to "do the right thing" to ICE agents who are "putting children in cages." She said ICE employees she has spoken to in her role as an activist say they are "doing the right thing" in implementing federal immigration law. Raising her voice slightly, Fani-González said "I'm doing the right thing from my perspective, which will be very different from yours."
Considering that a majority of those who opposed the plan were Democrats, many in the room were offended by the remarks, which were certainly unnecessary and out-of-bounds.
I think a lot of the opposition could either have been solved - or alternatively, hardened - if more detailed renderings had been provided. Personally, I have not taken a position for or against the 4 Bethesda Metro Center plan in part for that reason. Based on what has been shown, I think there is potential for Brookfield's plan to be successful, but I am puzzled as to why we cannot see detailed renderings of the actual building to fully understand how it will relate to its surroundings and the proposed open space.
When Carr Properties rolled out its vision for 7272 Wisconsin, right at the beginning, they brought out highly-regarded architect Robert Sponseller. The impressive renderings of true trophy towers, and Sponseller's promises of touches like a staircase you would find at a "nice Italian villa," helped considerably to start the project off on a positive note with the community. Opposition to Carr's plan among the larger public has been quieter than in the case of the Metro Center or Westbard, for example. 7272 Wisconsin is a much-bigger project than 4 Bethesda Metro Center, so it's unclear why it is so challenging to provide the same detail. To be fair from a technical requirement standpoint, Carr's rollout included a site plan as opposed to just the sketch plan application, but it was still at the start of the public process.
Brookfield will be required to provide more detailed renderings at the Preliminary Plan stage by one of the conditions imposed in today's approval. Again, I still have hope that the Brookfield plan will turn out to be a success. We really can't afford for it not to be, and it will define Bethesda for tourists and economic development scouts for decades to come.
I happen to like the design of the Bethesda Metro Center as it is, at least until somebody decided to add artwork around the rim of the platform above the bus bays that looked like someone had defaced it with graffiti during the night. I was not even aware years ago that there was ever a plan to add another building to it, and it seems to really throw off the balance of he design. The fantastic modern architecture of the existing buildings, the dramatic fountain, and the sweeping open plaza are an impressive welcome to downtown Bethesda by car or transit.
Frankly, the poorly-conceived design restrictions in the worst-of-both-worlds Bethesda Downtown Plan, actually prevent the sort of artistic crown-jewel centerpiece effect that the final tower needs to work in its context. Yes, those same guidelines that are resulting in most of the new projects coming in under the new plan resembling each other. Oops. If Brookfield can somehow figure a way around those restrictions to deliver the needed effect here, and reactivate the plaza, I'm all in favor of their plan. They've certainly got the design minds on board that could do it.
I watched the current Metro Center being constructed while drinking Orange Freezes at the Hot Shoppes across the street. At the time, I was upset about the loss of the existing retail, movie theater, carousel and Swensen's Ice Cream. But the resulting redevelopment turned out better than I could have imagined. I'm not sure the perceived "failure" of the plaza has much to do with its architectural design, but simply with the fact that those in charge stopped using it for an ice rink, fireworks, and Christmas tree lightings. Hopefully, Brookfield can restore some of that energy and atmosphere again in the context of this plan, and through whatever improvements or refinements will be made at the Preliminary and Site Plan stages.
UPDATE: July 22 - This article was updated to correct a quotation error.
VOTE DYER!
ReplyDeleteI was not there, but it sounds like you have reported the proceedings quite fairly, given the controversial nature of this project. As you have pointed out, this project has only received sketch plan approval, what might be called conceptual approval. I agree that the designers at SOM need to really come up with an iconic and memorable design for this tower.
ReplyDeleteI would point out that the photo of the wooded model that supposedly described the proposed design was for the office building, a much wider and bulkier building than the residential building that is shown in the aerial rendering. A wooded model of the much slimmer and more angular residential tower was not shown on your posting.
"Bethesda resident Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an environmental scientist whose career included 18 years at the EPA"
ReplyDeleteYou left something out, Dyer.
"Frankly, the poorly-conceived design restrictions in the worst-of-both-worlds Bethesda Downtown Plan, actually prevent the sort of artistic crown-jewel centerpiece effect..."
ReplyDeleteOh, please...get an editor!
"I watched the current Metro Center being constructed while drinking Orange Freezes at the Hot Shoppes across the street. At the time, I was upset about the loss of the existing retail, movie theater, carousel and Swensen's Ice Cream."
ReplyDeleteYou are thinking of the Bethesda Square complex, where Lionsgate stands now, NOT the site of Bethesda Metro Center. This complex opened right at the time that the Metro Center site was being cleared. You could not have seen these looking out the window of the old Hot Shoppes.
Thank you, Robert, for your accurate and balanced summary.
ReplyDeleteYou were quite right to highlight Richard Tustian's written and oral testimony, which was authoritative and cogent. Were Dick Tustian still running the Montgomery County Planning Department, Bethesda would enjoy a far more balanced and thoughtful land use approval process. Alternatively, he would be a superb member of the Planning Board.
@1:50: Dick Tustian presented several wooden models featuring alternative designs for 4 Bethesda Metro Center, which give a sense of how a property with a smaller footprint would work at the site.
It is a sad and ironic commentary on the current Planning Department and Planning Board that scale models have not been demanded from Brookfield, a major international developer, and instead have been created by a member of the public. Similarly, as pointed out in Dick Tustian's written testimony, Brookfield has not been required to submit sunlight and shadow studies, wind tunnel studies and pedestrian path/volume studies. These studies and the scale models were noted as desirable information by the Design Advisory Panel that reviewed the project, but the County has continued its approval process without them.
Also unfortunate: Planning Director Gwen Wright's comment that the Planning Department had designated the interior plaza at 4 Bethesda Metro Center as "private use space." The site is publicly owned land (owned by WMATA) and only ground leased by Brookfield. The public interest should therefore be paramount in determining the use and design of this particular site. But trust neither Ms. Wright nor Planning Board members to emphasize this important point.
I agree with Robert that Planning Board Member Natali Fani-Gonzalez's intemperate remarks to residents were unprofessional and uncalled for. The residents who asked the Planning Board to "do the right thing" were arguing in favor of a more expansive, street-facing park and were pointing out that Bethesda ranks poorly (second to bottom among major urban locations in the DC region) in park space adjusted for population. These sentiments are not worthy of a rebuke, especially in light of the Planning Board's tendency to favor the priorities of developers.
Ms. Fani-Gonzalez erroneously suggested that a larger green open space would not receive the arts programming promised by Brookfield. In fact, the County could require Brookfield to provide arts programming for a larger park, as well as the current design.
One more point: Planning Board chair Casey Anderson was quick to hold Clark's attorney to 3 minutes, perhaps to limit the impact of Clark's dramatic slide showing the massing of the proposed Brookfield building. This information was crucial to an understanding of the project and should have been required as an element of Brookfield's presentation. But once again, the Planning Department and Planning Board cut corners when it comes to informing the public whose interests they supposedly safeguard.
Were others limited to 3 minutes also? Because Clark is a neighbor and not a stake-holder in any legal or financial way. Just like other commentary.
DeleteThe Planning Commission is a rubber stamp for developers. This is what the Council wants them to be. They're going to ram through as many approvals as possible before Elrich takes over. I think we will see many more proposals that are not yet ripe approved.
ReplyDelete2:48: LOL - what do you figure was blocking the view? The Clark Building? LOL You are mixing several things together I said in typical Saul Alinsky fashion.
ReplyDelete"The way only a lifelong resident can bring it to you."
"LOL - what do you figure was blocking the view? The Clark Building? "
ReplyDeleteNope. There were two blocks and several buildings between the Hot Shoppes (at Wisconsin and East-West Highway) and the Bethesda Square building (at Old Georgetown and Woodmont) - the Federal Building, the old Safeway, and several other buildings.
9:17: Saul, you seem to have mixed together what I said about watching the Bethesda Metro Center being constructed, which indeed could be done from Hot Shoppes directly across the street, and my lament about the lost businesses associated with the Metro development. Classic Alinsky tactics, but no cigar.
ReplyDeleteGood for the board. We need efficiency and not an encyclopedia for bored hustlers like Adebayo to dictate what is right. It looks fantastic and it's much needed. Hey Marsha, if you're such an expert, why didn't you get off your seat and start a politically correct, unicorn construction company? I guess it's easier to complain for a living.
ReplyDeleteI'm here to challenge Dyer's logic and hyperbole.
ReplyDelete"Only a lifelong resident can bring this side of the story to you."
"Saul, you seem to have mixed together what I said..."
ReplyDeleteNo, you're just incapable of writing clearly.
Very deceptive story. For those who don't know Dyer is a big Trump supporter and is very anti-immigrant.
ReplyDelete7:36am stop making stuff up.
Delete11:39 no you stop making stuff up
ReplyDeleteComments at the other place note that the wooden model is way out of scale in terms of height - the proposed building would need to be 400 feet tall for it to be accurate.
ReplyDeleteI'm for most all new development in Bethesda. There will be room for parks to balance things out and the density helps make us stronger.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the placement of this Brookfield project stands alone as a complete unmitigated disaster. If that sketch comes to fruition, it will be a monumental regret that everyone in Maryland will have to live with for our lives. This location is remarkably shortsighted on so many levels. For Bethesda, this project represents the quintessential jump the shark moment.
Even the quickie 3D designs illustrate, the simple wisdom in keeping that monster structure a bit removed from the Wisconsin Avenue and Old Georgetown Corner. Sunlight and connectivity still matter. That's ground Bethesda ground central and they want to ban sunlight. You simply don't get a mulligan on that one.
At a minimum, anyone voting for this placement should be required to sign their name on the front door when the building's complete (and disclose all profits).
Hyperbole without end.
ReplyDelete"it will be a monumental regret that everyone in Maryland will have to live with for our lives."
ReplyDeleteOh, please.