Five years after it was first proposed, construction of a new residential building at the edge of downtown Bethesda is underway. 4725 Cheltenham Drive was formerly home to a Midas auto service center. In May of 2020, Bozzuto proposed constructing a 90' tall residential building on the site. The plan was approved by Montgomery County in January 2021. Six months later, Washington, D.C. development firm Community Three acquired the property. The plan was altered to allow for additional units, for a total of 110 apartments.
Construction workers are currently using heavy equipment to grade the site for the 76,841-square-foot building. Branded as "Cheltenham," the new development will have no parking. Residents will be directed to park in the public parking garage diagonally across Cheltenham Drive from the building site.
72 comments:
Busiest CVS in town. Please CVS, open another location to replace the once across from Channel 5.
"Oh boy, apartments!!! Just what I always wanted! Thank you, Santa!!!"
"No parking" is another social engineering fallacy that will push a lot of cars into the neighborhood streets. As usual, the Council hasn't thought this thing through but they'll probably celebrate "walkable Bethesda" completely forgetting that by their own policy, they've killed off the legitimate nightlife in favor of the repeat criminals allowed to roam without consequence. I'm sure the low income tenants will be thrilled to pay MC parking fees although there will undoubtedly be a taxpayer way to fund that as well.
Did you know that downtown Bethesda has a NDAMS (non driver automobile mode share) of over 55%? This means that 55% of folks that live in and work in downtown Bethesda do not use a personal automobile to get around. They walk, bike, ride share (Uber and Lyft), car share (ZipCar) take a bus ( WMATA, Ride On or Bethesda Circulator) or the Metro and soon the Purple Line to get around. The apartments in this new building are mostly tiny junior one bedroom units with built in Murphy beds, and compact furnished living rooms. Perfect for young singles for their first apartment, short term business rentals.The last thing they need is the expense of owning, financing, leasing insuring, fueling, maintaining and parking a private car, now estimated at over $10500 per year.
It’s beyond irresponsible to insert 100+ Apartments units with ZERO dedicated parking. Is this a joke?
Come on ! The nice homes in Edgemoor aren’t going to burgle THEMSELVES!
Just to add to the conversation about cars. I go to that CVS all the time. Recently, I noticed the parking lot was packed but the store was empty. I asked the management what was going on and was told the people park in the CVS lot all the time and walk off. They periodically patrol their parking lot and have even towed cars away. What do some of those same people do who have had their car towed? Go right back to the CVS and park for free and walk off again. I was told that even Marriott HQ employees do this. Those are high paying, white-collar jobs. They don't have parking benefits? I believe they do. That entire side of Wisc Ave is due to be blown up. How long will that CVS last? They have plenty of new customers steps away so maybe they'll remain.
According to 12:16, (paid shill for the MC Council), 55% won't have cars. Unfortunately for the othe 45%, if the most optimistic figure is to be believed, (unlikely because they lie about everything else), will still have a parking problem. Once again, putting lipstick on a pig doesn't solve anything. Try apologizing for this huge oversight instead of BS statistics that don't even make your case.
Those 45% of residents that do have cars can easily park in the county park deck across the street with a monthly parking permit. The deck is nearly vacant at night and on weekends, when residential parking would be used. This is called reciprocal parking, where different uses share the same spots and different times of day. Not providing underground parking in the building saves a ton of construction cost that can make multi-family housing much more affordable, and allows affordable housing construction and leasing to be more profitable for developers. There might be some enforcement issues on nearby “free” parking lots, or residential streets, so the developer should be charged for enhanced enforcement to mitigate problems. By the way, I’m not a paid shill for anyone, but simply a downtown apartment resident who barely drives. Living is such a wakable urban area means many can do the same. Keep in mind that the 55% NDAMS share includes people that live outside of downtown Bethesda who don’t drive cars to get their, including workers, shoppers, diners, and hotel guests. I suspect the percentage of apartment residents who need to park their cars is higher that 55%, but again, county parking decks are easily used for this purpose. Dedicated, reserved parking under your apartment is nice, but certainly not essential, especially for young single folks living in a 500 SF junior one-bed apartment. Also, most new multi-family buildings only provide about 0.6 parking spaces per unit, even in luxury buildings. Condos on the other hand usually have dedicated deeded parking spaces that developers feel is essential to sell their luxury units.
Furthermore, the cost to build an underground parking space is currently between $75K and $100K per space. And it’s even higher in these compact, convoluted and inefficient parking decks. At this project the cost to build a space is likely about $125,000, so to add 100 parking spaces, the developer would need to spend about $1.25M more, and would likely pass that increase on to the tenant, or more likely, not build the project at all. Operating costs include extensive mechanical ventilation, more stairs and elevators, motorized overhead gates and fire suppression and security systems.
801 & 811 really don't get it. Pushing for the most optimistic wishful thinking view of the use of space isn't the way the real world works. From my point of view as an owner of two condos across the street from the metro that has dedicated parking, this is good as it makes my units more valuable. But then the overhead view of the parking situation isn't good. You see that it's more than just me thinking of myself, (this is a difficult ask for you), but how it truly impacts the neighborhood. You guys have already wrecked the MD budget, the power grid and now it's on to forcing behavior by limiting parking but that's fine because liberal bean counter who probably has parking says so.
Take The Fairmont, (across the street from the 7-11 that your boss has turned into homeless central - until the PL gets here at which point west Bethesda will be an afterdark wasteland), for example which has no dedicated parking. Owners & tenants rent spots next door AND across the street in the parking garage that "nobody uses at night". I wish you were my employee so I could fire you.
Such a waste of development space. Heard rumors they tried to buy the CVS owner out and they refused. Would've given a much larger footprint and maybe some park land.
The original developer had completely different (and better, imo) plans for this location. The plans were for an apartment building with a mix of studios and 1 and 2 bedrooms, with parking for about 50% of the units. That seemed reasonable, but that developer backed out years ago.
The current/new developer's plans to have NO parking for 110 units -- with the expectation, as presented to the East Bethesda residents (and the planning board and county council) that NO ONE will have a vehicle, which is completely unrealistic -- are a big concern for the residential neighborhood where the building will be.
And believe me, those tiny studio apartments will not be affordable. My guess is that they'll run close to if not over $2000 a month, not including utilities, pet fees (if allowed), or any amenities.
Those of us in the neighborhood of East Bethesda have expressed concern about the parking issue since the new developer's plans first became available. We've gone to the planning board, county council, and county rep to express those concerns.
While it's great that a good portion of ppl working/living/using downtown Bethesda fall under the NDAMS, residential parking is an issue, even with permits and restrictions. I'm curious, fair poster, what percentage of that 55% are people who LIVE in our neighborhood? We're the ones who have to deal with the issue.
The 2017 Downtown Bethesda 20-year development plan requires new buildings, both residential and commercial, to provide parking, although a 1:1 ratio of units to parking spots is not required (i.e., it can be less than 1:1, as the original developer planned). Unfortunately, developers can apply for waivers, which seem to never be denied. Meanwhile, our voices are ignored, and not only on this issue.
So, who cares about what is important to the residents and taxpayers in this county? It's obviously a rhetorical question.
@8:01/8:11 Only a paid shill for Elrich, (or someone on the council would talk like that and include studies, (probably internal massaged numbers), used to justify the decision to allow this project with zero parking. What normal apartment resident uses "NDAMS (non driver automobile mode share)" language? You guys should spend your time figuring out why letting misdemeanor thieves and other criminals out without cash bail creates recidivism but I'm sure it will work eventually, right?
Yes, it is. Tell that to the planning board and county council. Oh wait! We did, and they didn't give a crap.
Once again, why can’t the residents who insist on owning cars in this building simply pay monthly to park in the underused county parking deck located directly across the street from this project? No it wouldn’t be a secured, reserved parking space, but I suspect folks that live in a tiny studio apartment might not own expensive cars. And once again I am not a shill, but simply a resident who knows how to read the Downtown Bethesda Overlay Plan and how the idea of measuring NDAMS to measure the success of reducing car usage. It’s quite clear in the plan how this metric can help enhance affordable housing, reduce traffic, and encourage transit use.
Should of left Midas untouched.
Residential parking permits and strict enforcement are essential tools for any residential area close to dense development. I never fully understand how single family residents living in East Bethesda seem to enjoy the obvious walkable benefit of living so close to downtown, and all it offers, including enhanced property values, but often seek to impede any development in their backyard. Preferring instead to live adjacent to muffler shops, CVS parking lots, drive through banks and their parking lots.
@7:53 The more you try to defend lack of oversight in favor of developers the more you bury yourself, not to mention that you sound exactly like a cheap salesman pushing miracle cures. Read what you wrote as it's direct propaganda for one of the social engineering highlights this council is promoting all while not living by the same rules themselves. The entire planning board and MC council should resign for utter stupidity.
Keep repeating "I'm not a shill" if it helps you sleep at night but if it walks and talks like a duck...
8:03 - Your comments are all over the place. Of course permits, etc are crucial for these adjacent neighborhoods of which there are many in Bethesda downtown district. Agreed. But who was there first, the neighborhood and the houses. They enjoy walkable, etc but they should be ok with some stupid apartment building that will be built with zero parking? This isn't Tokyo? You wouldn't want those cars parking in front of your house either.
I look forward to the day (hopefully soon) when the entire east side of Wisconsin north of East West Highway is fully lined with handsome seven to nine story high mixed-use buildings, all with ground level retail shops and restaurants, with the nearby single family homes buffered by a series of nice linear green spaces. No more cheesy open parking lots next to nearly empty office buildings. The stepped building heights will be a nice transition from up to 300’ tall high-rises on the west side of Wisconsin, down to a more residential scale. It would be even better if some of the single family homes facing the new greenway were replaced with 3-4 story high town houses and row houses.
By the way, five buildings that follow this model are already fully entitled, and many more are surely in the developer pipeline. Maybe a clever developer will include a new hotel, a performing arts center or incorporate a new county recreation center with an indoor pool.
I'm sure that 6:30's plan is already in the works by this criminal MC council who has already taken 2-lanes out of OGR and LFP. Better hurry up and road diet Wisconsin, Arlington & the DT section of Bradley to make life as miserable as possible for those who can't afford to live in Bethesda. Counting on an ignornant electorate is a pretty safe play in MC that might end up biting its master in the end. All one has to do is look at DTSS.
I don’t live in a house, and prefer to rent a flat in a dense walkable neighborhood, but you are free to parking in front of my apartment anytime! And to answer your question, just because the houses were there first, they should not deny others to live in a great transit-oriented town, that makes every effort to improve itself with sound planning and development. Why do NIMBY’s believe their so called rights should prevent others from thriving? I got mine, but you can’t have yours because I was first? And one last time, rent a small apartment in this building and pay to park in the nearly vacant county deck across the street, but certainly don’t park in front of JAC’s place…
My comments are not all over the place, but intended to encourage and support more opportunities to live in, work in and visit a great place like downtown Bethesda.
@6:30 AM: You obviously don't live in East Bethesda, and probably not in downtown Bethesda either. We're not against development, but there's already too much density and overpriced bloat (with more buildings already approved) and no consideration of the residents' concerns.
There should be a pause to build/complete what's already been approved and then do *comprehensive* assessments on the impact of the growth on all aspects of downtown life once the new buildings are in place before moving ahead.
11:08 Sounds exactly like one of those socialists prepared to take from those "for the greater good" as they see it.
"they should not deny others to live in a great transit-oriented town"
Just wow. Would you mind if I stop by your apartment to see if your computer is better than mine so I won't be denied the full experience to the internet?
Some criminals just lie, steal and cheat, others are on the MC council or simply shill for them.
11:08 could simply petition their boss for zoning changes instead of the socialist plan to take from those they see fit. Marx would be proud.
The fact is that democrats are the ones who champion NIMBY laws that won't allow the zoning changes that you profess. They're beholden to developers and their wealthy donors but then whine about affordable housing. Fact is that people like 11:08 are actually encouraging NIMBY behavior by who they work/vote for but their answer is always that socialist totalitarian hiding behind the curtain as the ideal society.
I would think that a set of well defined mid-rise buildings, with amenities like retail for nearby single family homes, would be a great buffer to help separate East Bethesda from the much taller buildings west of Wisconsin. You guys rightfully fought hard to keep the height down to 70’ and 90’ as a transition zone, without allowing any extra floors as a bonus, and of course stood your ground to insist on a the implementation of the Eastern Greenway. The three block long, 70’ wide greenway by the way, with extensive shade trees, pathways and benches, that you will soon enjoy, will be fully funded and maintained by three of those so called overpriced bloat buildings. And no, I don’t live in that neighborhood, but if I did m, I would welcome the proposed improvements, nearby retail shops and cafes and amenities. I think East Bethesda will feel more integrated with downtown, and less of a neighborhood separated from downtown by a six lane boulevard lined with surface parking lots, 7/11, and vacant office buildings. Yes of course, non-resident street parking must be enforced to make this work. Traffic patterns should be established to minimize cut through traffic as well.
I think you are taking the concept of improving the public realm for the greater good way out of context. No one is denying your right to live in a single family home adjacent to a thriving downtown. But you need to consider the benefits of all when it comes to city planning issues. It’s not all just about you my friend.
Using the term "Flat" means you're a foreigner (probably UK) and typing "free to parking" means English is your second language.
Shill here. After reading all of your arguments, I have seen the light. I now believe the best thing for East Bethesda would be to stop all nearby proposed development. Don’t even allow existing property owners to improve their properties. Don’t let any nearby run down apartments, muffler shops, banks or greasy restaurants be replaced with nasty new MPDU units and Class A retail over limited underground parking. Just let those lots slowly degrade, weeds, then trees sprouting from cracks in the pavement. Eventually Mother Nature will reclaim the area and a new dense forest of trees and understory and will restore the land. Deer and other wildlife will thrive. Maybe even a beaver dam or two. Hell no to office to residential conversions, lets have vacant parking lots to forest conversions. East Bethesda will have a wonderful dense buffer from nasty downtown Bethesda, and live in peace and harmony with nature.
Or, not.
Love how 7:25 tries to pivot on their own words. You use certain language but have absolutely no idea what it means. Try reading what you wrote and compare it to Marx, ("From each according to his ability to each according to his need"), although you're probably triggered by his use of gender specific language.
Presupposing that I have a personal interest in east Bethesda would be liberal speculation as my interest is actually putting you and your boss on unemployment so Bethesda can thrive without the social engineering as we're heading towards a future that resembles DTSS.
5:39 will never see the light until the epiphany that happens when one needs make it on their own outside of a government hand out, (job or entitlement - very little difference in this area). Frankly I'm surprised you're not at the "no kings" rally with all the other paid protesters as some of us need to work and provide for all those like you who do nothing but take.
I find it a bit odd that four of the five fully entitled projects near East Bethesda do not have frontage on Wisconsin. Developers are seeking these likely cheaper lots, and for now at least, avoiding lots that can likely include ground level retail space. I would have thought the Wisconsin Avenue frontage lots, with taller height allowed, would be more ideal for dense development. It will be a bit odd to see these four new projects hugging the neighbors but avoiding Wisconsin Avenue at least for now. Many of these Wisconsin frontage lots seem to be prime candidates for redevelopment, and would likely have less pushback from the neighbors to the east.
I’ve never worked for the government, only in the private sector planning, designing and constructing the built environment for 45 years. I strive to create timeless, durable, and iconic architectural and urban spaces. I moved here from the Midwest specifically because of the progressive and thoughtful nature of urban planning in Bethesda and the great public transit. The Downtown Bethesda Sector Plan is a great example of how the parks and planning departments can shape growth in a positive and comprehensive method. Balancing carefully considered development opportunities with improvements to the public realm inducing new parks and green spaces, sustainable environmental design, affordable housing, architectural design excellence and the creation of a dense walkable community.
I hope you enjoyed the parade.
Actually I didn’t go to a No Kings rally, but I did enjoy the parade downtown. I think my favorite float was the big inflatable ballon of Ronald McDonald. You know, the one with the orange hair…
I'm sure your boss would have hated it if you skipped the parade. The left is so predictable and sad, (not to mention extraordinarily violent). Nobody believes someone who parrots council talking points like a used car salesman and then has to lie about their association but hey, whatever works for you.
There's a line from a movie that's relevant: "you don't know what it's like in the private sector, they expect results", which is why it's very unlikely you're not on some type of government payroll.
Working/shilling for the council and whatever leftist/socialist outrage of the day is no way to go through life but perhaps when you grow up you might have that epiphany.
2:20 PM Sorry my friend, but again I have never worked for the government, the county council or whatever you might consider a leftist/socialist outrage of the day. I did design several buildings for the Amry Corp of Engineers, the Federal Government and various local communities, but most of my 175 built projects over my career have been for the private sector. Perhaps you have mistaken my so called shill talking points for someone who believes in the merits of sound urban planning, architectural design and the crafting the public realm, and knows how to write about them. Much of my work was designing transit oriented, mixed-use and multi-family projects in downtowns very much like Bethesda, but I have not designed any capers in the DMV. And by the way, unfortunately I am fully grown up.
5:39 PM: NO ONE is against development, but it's out of control. We reached the soft cap to add millions of square feet of new construction (residential and commercial) under the 20-year 2017 Downtown Bethesda Development plan in 7 years.
Several already-approved projects, including multiple high-rise buildings, haven't even broken ground yet.
Meanwhile, provisions for expanded green space and schools are woefully behind what was approved in the 2017 plan. Gee, I wonder why that is?
Let's slow down and complete what has already been approved before approving or proceeding with any further development.
It's our neighborhood, and the residents should have a say that is incorporated into current and future plans!
The three block East Bethesda Greenway is now fully entitled, developer funded and is awaiting construction tied to development. The Capital Crescent Civic Green is fully funded, with planning about to start with construction next year. The two block Bethesda Market Park is fully designed, partially funded, and awaiting final site plan submission by the developer before it can be developer funded and built. MoCo parks and planning are now studying how Veterans Park can be expansion on adjacent property instead of the poorly envisioned bifurcated park idea. The fully renovated county park by the library just opened with a massive new playground. Since the plan was adopted, dozens of privately owned public spaces have been created, remodeled or expanded. Many of the goals of the 2017 plan are indeed being realized.
More new projects that get entitled and constructed means that more public realm enhancements can be conceived and built. More green-spaces, more green roofs, more sustainable design, more projects with design excellence, more folks riding and supporting transit, more separated bike lanes, more restaurants, cafes, theaters, more hotels, and most importantly many more multi-family housing options, both luxury and affordable MPDU units, all enhanced by improved walkability and sensible growth.
Residents have a say in that they elect commissioners who appoint planning department members and hire planning staff. The public is always welcome to be part of the review and approval process. I personally or virtually attend as many as I can and add to the discussion. The Design Advisory Panel is a good choice to speak up early in the process.
Most communities in America do not have caps on development, but are regulated by zoning. Their ordinances prescribe a maximum amount of height and density for each lot and the entitlement process is reviewed by their planning commissions. A development cap places a moratorium on development beyond a certain point which seems counterintuitive to sound planning principles. Set the desired maximum density with zoning, with checks and balance on adequate infrastructure as required and not by some artificial means of a cap. This is how the revised downtown Bethesda sector plan is now set up and about to be ratified by the county council. No caps are required that stifle development.
7:09 - In a word, Rosslyn.
Let me say this one more time. I’m not a shill. I am just someone who enjoys the benefits of living in a growing, walkable dense community that is not afraid to grow and get better based on sound urban planning principles.
By the way, fellow YIMBY’s should rejoice because there are currently 28 more high-rises between 7 and 31 stories tall, that are under construction, fully entitled, partially entitled and in the pipeline for approval.
In a previous post forgot to mention that the former development cap in the 2017 plan was never intended to stop new development, but was intended to pause new entitlements while adequate public facility’s could be reviewed and adjusted as required. There is now nothing in the revised ordinance that limits new development up to and including the allowable height and density listed for each lot.
In theory, downtown Bethesda could grow to be four to five times as large as it is now if all lots were fully developed to their maximum allowable height assuming that appropriate public facilities like schools, roads, water and sewer systems, storm water systems, the electrical grid were approved and constructed along the way. Most of these required expanded public facilities would be funded by impact fees charged to developers, including park impact payments and extensive school impact fees.
8:38 - Bottom line, no one expected, nor wanted, Bethesda downtown district to turn into Rosslyn, VA but that's where it's headed. So, adjacent neighborhoods, with multi-million dollar homes in many cases are rightfully and justifiably concerned.
@8:38 If you have to keep telling everyone you're not a shill...
Tell your MC council masters that doing the same thing over and over expecting different results wastes taxpayer dollars but who cares, right?
Gotta laugh at the gas leaf blower exemption resolution for commercial landscapers. As usual, the council never thinks things through. This along with the upcoming loss in SCOTUS over religious exemptions, road diets for a handful of cyclists etal making MC the laughing stock of the country.
12:41 - they destroy entire roadways in favor of an extremely small amount of cyclist. Roads were designed for cars and don't dare anybody on this blog say that they were designed for anything else but automobiles.
Not a shill here again. When you say that no one expected or wants Bethesda to continue to grow as a walkable vibrant transit oriented city, I think you are wrong. Lots of folks seem to love Bethesda and how it is changing, including me, in fact the kinetic quality of the city is what drew me here. I would agree that some local homeowners might miss the good old days of only a few dozen high-rises, or even earlier back in the 1950’s. Bethesda has been on a very health growth spurt since the Metro came to town in 1984. I think the county planning department has done a very good job of crafting an ordinance that encourages growth in exchange for public realm improvements. Yes of course some folks hate any kind of change, but I would suggest that downtown Bethesda is a much better place than it has ever been. Still not a shill.
@7:09 "I personally or virtually attend as many as I can and add to the discussion"
I'll bet you do. As a county information, (disinformation really), spokesman. Remember Brandon's press secretary KJP? Lied every single day with enthusiasm and then declared that she was the best press secretary ever. If the voters in this county ever started judging candidates by results, you and the entire council would be out of a job. Lucky for you the majority of voters in MC are ignorant and apathetic.
"When you say that no one expected or wants Bethesda to continue to grow as a walkable vibrant transit oriented city, I think you are wrong."
Who said this? Typical leftist propaganda to justify council means to their ends.
Let’s take this discussion back to Robert’s original post. Why in the world would you require a developer to build underground parking on a tiny infill site, when the Cheltenham County Parking Deck, is directly across the street, and has 298 parking spaces? As I stated earlier, underground parking is extremely expensive to build and operate. Each space likely add about $100K to the cost of construction, which would mean developers would likely require much higher rents. I currently park my “old man tan” 1998 Shillmobile directly under my apartment in a secure monthly parking space. I can assure you that if I had to pay maybe $1000 per month more in rent to pay for a space under my building, I would surely pay to park in a county parking deck that is currently $195 per month. Folks complain about the lack of affordable housing in Bethesda. This is likely a big reason. Most progressive urban communities allow residents to pay monthly in city or county owned parking decks. The $195 per month parking space rent goes to maintaining and building even more parking removing the expensive burden of requiring developers to do so, and enabling more affordable housing options, especially for those willing to reduce or eliminate their car ownership and encourage the use of mass transit, bus use, bike riding, ride share and car share services, and even living in dense urban space where walking is preferred to driving.
@6:33 This is a difficult concept for someone who tows the leftist tripe that we don't need cars or banning fossil fueled cars by 2035. With the left, its always about control and "knowing" better than the " little people" they're supposed to serve. Believe it or not, there are actually people that want to live in Bethesda and don't actually work there. Not providing parking for at least 50% of the units by rattling off the number of parking spaces demonstrates how detached from reality you and your council masters are.
There are listings for parking spaces in several buildings in Bethesda & Chevy Chase that come up occasionally and they sell. Allowing a developer to build without parking impacts the surrounding neighborhood which I get that you don't give a wit about because you and your partner can live with one car so therefore everyone should live like you. You said "it's not all about you" when in fact that is the case. Democrats are always about control regardless of outcome so your job is safe. In the real world where the rest of us live, results matter.
Did you even read my post? There are exactly 298 parking garage spaces in the county deck DIRECTLY across the street from this project. Only about a 66 foot walk away from their lobby. The county charges way less than private developers do for covered parking. $195 a month in a county deck and at least $225 to $250 in a private parking deck. I don’t understand why you still think that, in this instance at least, the developer should be required to provide on site underground parking on this tiny lot, when cheaper available parking is available in an underused deck only steps from their project. By the way, none of these rental apartment buildings provide on site parking for free. Condos almost always include at least one deeded parking space in their purchase price, but these are clearly not condos.
I don’t think this is detachment from reality, but a conscious effort to utilize existing available parking resources and keep these new apartments as affordable as possible.
This is exactly what JAC said: “Bottom line, no one expected, nor wanted, Bethesda downtown district to turn into Rosslyn, VA but that's where it's headed.” My point was that lots of folks disagree with JAC statement and expected and wanted Bethesda to grow. Perhaps not like Rosslyn, but the Bethesda master plan has always anticipated a steady amount of growth. I am just trying to support that growth to be a positive for as many folks as possible. Not just blindly accepting any developers proposal, but holding them to a higher standard to help improve the public realm. In exchange for entitlement.
1:52 wants to have it both ways in that selling public parking spaces that no one is guaranteed while approving more projects without parking. Have you and the other council idiots calculated the tipping point for parking overflow? Of course not because it might blow up in your face not that it's ever stopped you in the past. Another thing about inexpensive public parking versus the developer building spaces. You must think that the county building parking garages as a standalone facility is cheaper than requiring the developer to build in parking below a new building. Math isn't your strong suit, (frankly most liberals are severely math challenged), as these facilities operate at a loss, (read taxpayer subsidized), when everything is taken into account, (Land, construction, LABOR, maintenance & utilities. But as long as it's someone else's money, right?
The horror of giving people a choice of paying for secure parking within the building they're living in, (you know hauling groceries or bringing home bulky items), all while you guys have no interest in enforcing laws which allow criminals to rob, steal, vandalize. Consistency is one thing you have going for you along with brazen ignorance and apathy.
Why doesn't the council take away the surface parking for all the rentals along Battery Lane and build affordable housing? There is long term plan in place but why not start these little people on the path to leftist redemption by forcing them out of their cars right now. According to 1:52, there's plenty of parking using the garage on Woodmont and besides, these people really shouldn't have cars to begin with as it's only a couple of blocks at the most and I'm sure it would never rain or snow when someone is trying to bring back things from the strore, (not groceries because they should be forced to walk to HT or TJ's to help save the planet).
The council and their shills are a complete joke who would never survive in the private sector.
The construction of above ground parking structures by the county is indeed much cheaper than construction underground parking decks. Lot 31 being the one underground deck that the county has built. Above ground decks can rely on natural ventilation instead of the high cost of mechanical ventilation.
My point was why not use an existing under-used 298 space county parking deck, by renting monthly parking spaces to nearby apartment dwellers? Of course the county is not selling these spaces, but in fact getting $195 per month for every space it rents. These fees can help the county maintain these decks, and even build more as required. Many cities in America that have public parking decks allow reciprocal parking for nearby residents to more fully use the deck, and to reduce the cost that developers have to pay to incorporate underground parking within their buildings. Yes of course a private reserved underground parking space under your apartment is nice, but adds quite a bit to the cost to build and rent these apartments. Especially for this project filled mostly with tiny junior one bedroom apartments, only steps from the Metro.
Your point is a constant lie as you continue to trott out the number of parking spaces and know absolutely nothing about commercial construction. Go back to school and get your money back for any post HS education probably paid for by someone else. Waste of time posting any numbers for you as we've done that for the council before and you guys operate in a world with a zero sum gain. There is also something called the time value of money but once again completely wasting my time with a "true believer". Not the way the real world works but that never stops the MC council.
This a very good point. In fact Aldon has preliminary approval to do just that on Battery Lane. New apartments with underground parking are proposed on four lots along Battery Lane, including new separated bike lanes and reduced drive lanes to boot. Of course all the run down apartments that are cheap only because they are crappy will be replaced with 80% market rate apartments and 20% MODU units. I think Aldon may have sold a few of these sites to the HOC, so some might remain as so called “naturally occurring” affordable housing. The tall Aldon tower on Wisconsin was recently sold to another developer and will be renovated by the new owner. Not sure if those will be market rate.
@4:00 Do you realize that there are ongoing labor costs with a county owned parking facility that don't exist in a private complex? Those costs are significant and never go down but there you are comparing it to an underground garage which is part of a larger multi-story building which doesn't come with the long term labor expense. Also, what is the value/cost of the land used for parking alone versus mixed use? This is why the council is like proverbial deer in the headlights when there's a problem during ANY issue.
@5:30 The administration of HOC is also one of the reasons why democrats aren't even qualified to be dog catcher. Goes back to human nature where you give people something without any requirements of any personal responsibility and what do you get? Consistent problems, (destruction of property and domestic issues), the financial fallout of which fall on taxpayers and residents of the complexes that HOC owns units in. This is why you fail and your kids end up as unemployed antifa supporting losers that the rest of us end up supporting.
I guess you are right. I have only designed and constructed 12 above ground parking decks and 4 underground parking decks in my 45 year long career. One nine story deck has a green roof and is LEED Certified. Two different parking decks have won a total of three American Institute of Architects Design Excellence Awards. I have also designed and built over a dozen multi-family, mixed-use, transit oriented projects in urban setting and two Amtrak Stations. I guess you are right and I don’t really know what I’m talking about. Thanks for pointing that out.
I am referring the use of existing county parking garages compared to building new ones as part of new construction. Most parking decks are fully automated at this point and require very little labor cost. Underground decks are more expensive to build and operate because of retaining walls and mechanical ventilation. I certainly don’t suggest that the county build any more stand alone parking decks, as you are correct that the value/cost of the land is very expensive. I am glad that the county is working with developers near the East Greenway sites and near the Farm Womens Market to increase the amount of new underground county owned parking under new mixed use buildings to compensate for the loss of county owned surface parking lots. This is what happened at Lot 31 in Bethesda Row, but it seem the county when a bit overboard on the amount of underground parking to replace a surface lot. At least a new county parking deck in the area will likely not required for many decades.
If what you say is even remotely true, (internet resume), this indicates that you've learned nothing over your career. So why would someone with a successful resume like that be a tenant instead of an owner? I just call BS when I see it and someone who can state that nobody wants parking in the building they're actually living in because they can walk "66ft across the street" hasn't considered these end users which you've decided is better for them. This is typical MC Council social engineering behavior and very sad if over "45 years" you're still a leftist cheerleader instead of a contributor to society.
Maybe you should find out how many salaried employees it takes to run & maintain these standalone parking structures not to mention the large security issues that are a byproduct of democrat bail policies. You and the council are abject failures to the citizens of MC busy banning bamboo, gas leaf blowers while Rome burns so to speak. Look up legacy costs and tell me again how it's so much cheaper for the common taxpayer? Thinking things through is what the private sector does everyday or they go out of business. You on the other hand are just a paid handmaiden to the council. Time to grow up and get a real job.
Not everybody needs or wants to own a home or a condo. Especially in this part of the country. I never said that anyone would prefer to park in a deck across the street instead of parking under their building. But once again to build 110 parking spaces under a building on a very small site would likely add $100K per space, and that cost would likely mean higher rent. Certainly more than $195 per month that folks who choose to own a car in that building would pay to rent a monthly space at the Cheltenham deck. Some how I believe I have contributed more to society, and specifically to the built environment and to the public realm than you, but perhaps I am wrong.
Not sure what you mean by “legacy costs”? I can only assume you are suggesting that the taxpayer funded county sales and property taxes used to build and maintain county owned parking decks are somehow a bad idea. Perhaps you believe all the cost of parking should be paid for by private developers, and passed onto their tenants or anyone else parking in dense urban areas. May I ask if you believe this is also true for police services, fire and EMS services, public schools, trash and recycling collection, storm water systems, natural gas distribution, libraries, county parks, recreation centers, street lighting and other public realm amenities? If you don’t use it, you don’t want to pay the legacy cost to build, operate and maintain it. Did I get this right?
Liberals always believe they've contributed more because they have "good intentions" which don't put food on the table so to speak. The harsh reality of the real world demands results.
Your choices in life determine who you are and with the current tax code in the USA, a long successful career always includes some type of property ownership. The fact that you've chosen not to either means that you're not that successful or a poor planner. Probably both as a shill for the failed council.
By the way, I am not suggesting that the county should build anymore county parking decks. But I believe that in locations near underutilized county decks, allowing and even encouraging developers to build less or no on site parking at all makes perfect sense. Again to save cost, making apartments more affordable, and to encourage the use of mass transit. On existing county park lots near East Bethesda and the Farm Women’s Market, the county is wisely requiring developers to replace the lost parking as part of their entitlements.
There is a Latin phrase that applies to your line of thinking: Reductio ad absurdum which is exactly what you've done here.
You don't understand long term legacy costs because you've never understood or run a business. MC provides an extraordinarily generous defined pension plan that is now currently not fully funded because your big boss, Wes Moore who has blown through the surplus left by the previous governor and now approaches 3B will have difficulty funding and will pass on to the next governor. These costs will always get funded somehow as the embarrassment of failed liberal leadership is never dwelled upon, (look at Philadelphia & Chicago). All fun and game until you run out of other peoples money, (Margaret Thatcher), Calculating ALL the cost related to a government run facility some of which is the legacy of required additional employees required to run your "automated facility".
Just wasting time arguing with someone who celebrates bad choices and will never get it but frankly enjoying venting on a public forum with someone who shills for the council and thus lacks self-awareness about the policies they're promoting. One would think that you would take some kind of responsibility policies that have never worked but you have your foot firmly planted on the gas thinking that this time it will work.
Oh I have owned and remodeled several homes. Not exactly a “flipper” but enjoyed quite a bit of sweat equity and real estate appreciation. At this point in my life I have cashed out, down sized and invested my home equity and prefer to rent. More flexible choices, less hassle of home ownership, nothing to maintain or fix, easy to lock the door and travel, and the opportunity to move anywhere else if I get bored. Real estate ownership is rewarding, but can really take time and money to move and switch locations. It’s much more expensive to own real estate compared to where I used to live, and there are so many interesting luxury apartment buildings in walkable, transit oriented neighborhoods. I done living in a big home on a big lot in suburban sprawl, and much prefer a or urban location like downtown Bethesda. I guess that why at this point of my life, I am biased about this type of urban lifestyle, compared to a single family home in a car-centric subdivision.
I forgot to consider as a county employee who has an over generous pension that normal taxpayers will need to fund because your bosses have blown the budget to fund things like healthcare for Illegals. The rest of us have to plan for eventual retirement property ownership being one of those puzzle pieces. In the private sector there are generally only 401K's because of the tax code but why bother yourself with mundane details we little people need to deal with when you guys can pass laws/restrictions that you don't need to follow yourself?
If in fact your truly a private citizen but favors these social engineering policies like allowing developers to build without parking and don't own property as part of a future retirement plan. What can I say? Trust fund baby who doesn't need to worry or think that SS will cover you. I do feel sorry for people that feel the need to dictate how others should live but you and your ilk are the majority voting base in MC. Just sad really.
4:58 PM You forgot that I barely drive my car, and prefer to walk, bike, bus or take mass transit, so my foot is rarely even on the gas pedal. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on our opinions on providing zero parking at this project across the street from an underused county parking neck. I look forward to our debate on a different topic.
Satis est satis
This is what I mean by saying you have no empathy for people who don't live like you think they should and this is the basis of my problem with the council. Hopefully one day you'll have that epiphany and vote accordingly.
You guys are making things so difficult that we are looking at options to move the entire business plus all my rental properties out of MD and with that, you guys will have a few less taxpayers for your social experiments and we will leave you to yourselves ;-)
Post a Comment