The Foulger-Pratt redevelopment of the vacant Ourisman Ford dealership at Motor City Drive and Westlake Terrace in Bethesda will not be mixed-use. There's no market for ground-floor retail or dining at the site, and there is a shopping center and Westfield Montgomery Mall within easy walking distance, the developer argued at a pre-submittal community meeting at the Davis Library.
Therefore, Foulger-Pratt will ask the Montgomery County Planning Board to amend the previous approval of 340 units with retail and a 12000 SF restaurant space, and permit instead a residential-only building with 348 rental apartment units. The applicant is highlighting the planned entrance plaza as the focal point for the building, with a small park area, courtyards and leisure trail among the landscape amenities. There will also be a pool for residents.
 |
Grey area left of center is above-grade
parking garage structure |
Foulger-Pratt is also asking for permission to replace the previously-approved plan for underground parking with an above-grade parking structure. Their traffic study suggests there will be 84 outgoing trips during the peak of the morning rush hour. Separated 2-way bike lanes are planned for Westlake Terrace.
 |
Traffic circulation plan:
Green is delivery/maintenance,
purple is resident traffic |
Although the zoning for the site allows a height of 75', the building is expected to be only 64'. That is intriguing, given that there are no single-family homes or townhomes immediately adjacent to the site. Yet here the Planning Board would approve only 64'. while it approved heights significantly taller than that directly across from single-family homes on Westbard Avenue and Ridgefield Road last year. Once again, it's amateur hour at the Planning Board.
 |
| Landscaping plan |
The architectural design of the building isn't very clear or defined from the current renderings, but what's there doesn't appear very inspiring, resembling the Home Depot big box store that the building will face across Motor City Drive. Perhaps ground-level renderings with the entrance plaza and so forth will change that impression, but it's getting hard to be optimistic about architecture in Montgomery County these days. There's a legitimate concern that, when this entire area is redeveloped with "stack-and-pack" Soviet apartment blocs, this site could be a dead zone/wall between other mixed-use sites that do have ground floor retail on Westlake Terrace and the mall property.
 |
| Sketch plan |
47 comments:
"Yet here the Planning Board would approve only 64'. while it approved heights significantly taller than that directly across from single-family homes on Westbard Avenue and Ridgefield Road last year."
For a Waaambulance, please dial Whine-One-One.
<a href="https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/07/19/increasingly-anti-business-republicans-just-dismantled-texas-miracle>Texas Drops To 39th In Job Creation</a>
Texas Drops To 39th In Job Creation
Did the developer ask for more than 64'?
5:31: At Westbard, yes. Here, no.
5:27: From #1 to #39 in less than 5 years? I have to know the methodology for that measurement. Totally off-topic here, and hard to believe.
So why did you imply that the developer had asked for more than 64" and had been turned down by the MoCo Cartel?
Should they have approved height in excess of what the developer had requested?
What 6am said. That's what I was trying to understand as well.
"From #1 to #39 in less than 5 years? I have to know the methodology for that measurement."
By comparing the US Department of Labor/Bureau of Labor Statistics "new jobs created" statistics for each state for each month. No witchcraft involved.
Unemployment in Texas, June 2017 - 4.8%
Unemployment in Maryland, June 2017 - 4.1%.
"Soviet apartment blocs"
Sadly, it's too early in the morning to play the drinking game.
Amazing. They went to from a mixed use town center to just apartments with structured parking. Not a win for the community.
What "community"?
Where is the usual "Betrayed By Save Westbard" protest sign?
They shouldn't let the developer get away this with (but it's MoCo Planning Board, so I know they will). That area actually could support some retail on the ground floor. There is plenty of traffic passing by who could stop in, and the restaurants just across from Home Depot (Five Guys, etc) seem to do OK.
OFGS. Retail is dead. They can walk across to the mall to see closed stores. No need to feature them on the ground floor.
"resembling the Home Depot big box store that the building will face across Motor City Drive."
The facade of Home Depot on that side is completely windowless and blank. An apartment building won't look like this at all.
7:06: In massing, it looks similar.
6:08: They used numbers besides unemployment rate, I hope. Unemployment rate tells you next to nothing about job creation within a state or county.
6:00: I implied no such thing. What I implied is that the Planning Board has no standards when it comes to what height is appropriate where. Here, they won't demand greater height, and at Westbard, they won't dissuade greater height, even though at Westbard there are houses right across the street. They need to have objective standards, and they don't.
6:37: This isn't Westbard.
6:54 AM - 21 shops and restaurants closed in the first seven months of 2017:
Radio Shack
Bebe
Noodles & Co.
Stride Rite
Marbles: the brain store
Yum Crepes
Smart Toys
Peet's
Core
Sheepskin and Alpaca Too
Chocolate Moonshine
American Apparel
Bistro Sensations
Best Buy Mobile
Freddy
Naples Ristorante e Pizza
Fashion Time
American Classic Clothes
Icebreaker
Wetzel's Pretzels
The Limited
It's a shame. Motor City Drive could be a new main street, connecting the mall with other properties that will be redeveloped in the future.
Structured, above ground parking!
"Unemployment rate tells you next to nothing about job creation within a state or county."
Except, you know, the percentage of people who are able to find work. There's a reason it's the most-often-cited metric -- because it's useful! It just so happens it also shows how robust MoCo's economy is. But that doesn't fit with the author's narrative.
Well the implication is there whether you intended to or not. Just the way you wrote it I guess. Going under the height max is the developer's choice, and the planning board is not in any way suppressing their option to go higher.
What exactly do you mean? It's the developer's choice to remove retail, not the planning board's.
You could always purchase the lot and develop mixed use also
Dyer @ 7:14 PM -
Was my explanation too complicated? Should I have typed slower?
"By comparing the US Department of Labor/Bureau of Labor Statistics "new jobs created" statistics for each state for each month. No witchcraft involved."
Why should the MoCo Cartel "demand greater height"? This site is twice as far from the Metro as Westbard.
I could see that 270 exit on the bridge backing up big time. Hopefully that's part of the traffic study.
I am also very curious to hear Dyer's response to better understand what he means by this.
7:37: Unemployment rate only gauges how many people are employed (and excludes long-term unemployed) in a jurisdiction, not where they are employed. Particularly in Montgomery County, it's a useless stat - the majority of jobs created were in Northern Virginia and D.C., not in Montgomery County.
Montgomery County has suffered a net LOSS in jobs over the last decade, even as its unemployment rate has dropped, proving my point.
7:58: The same reason they should have discouraged greater height at Westbard, which is 2 miles from Metro, nowhere close to the standard walking distance required for smart growth. The Board is totally inconsistent, and the only constant is giving each applicant what they want.
So they approve less height for a non metro location and you complain? Because it's less than Westbard where everyone wanted less height?
I would think Foulger knows what would work and what doesn't work off of Motor City Drive. Office does not, but some "destination type retail" might. What I wouldn't want to see is a multi story garage to make this unsightly area, more unsightly..... What this tells me is that Rockspring park will never be what it could be. Also, I can't wait until Marriott leaves...fun times
I don't understand why Dyer and some readers are kvetching about the garage. It looks like it will be completely surrounded by the building and not visible from the street.
Maybe it's an issue with the site not being appropriate for underground parking?
Congratulations to Westfield on continued success in thwarting any competition on new retail space. The focus will remain on Montgomery Mall. Ourisman is now merely apartments and the long planned "Rock Spring Centre" site appears destined for school/community use (once the APF approval expires in 2019. At that point, Westfield will control the only Space in the Rock Spring Master Plan area suitable for significant new retail.
The same reason they should have discouraged greater height at Westbard, which is 2 miles from Metro, nowhere close to the standard walking distance required for smart growth. The Board is totally inconsistent
So the planning board should arbitrarily grant MORE height than is requested? How is it inconsistent to green-light applications that are within the confines of existing regulations? How much meddling would you like Hans Reimer to engage in, precisely?
Let's ask again: Did Foulger request more than 64' or no?
the only constant is giving each applicant what they want
How can you complain about the supposedly bad state of the county's economy and then turn around and bemoan the fact that private industry is being given the latitude to develop property as it sees fit?
Westbard is not "2 miles from the Metro". It is 1 mile from Friendship Heights as the crow flies, and 1.5 miles via the current twisting road network.
I mapped Kenwood place on Westbard Ave to friendship heights and it said 1.8 miles.
Regardless, no one walks to metro from there.
11:52: It is at least 1.8 miles walking distance from Westbard Avenue to FH Metro. Humans aren't "crows." That matters. The worldwide standard walking distance for "smart growth" urban density is 1/4 to 1/2 mile from rapid transit station. It's not even a close call.
"Westbard is not "2 miles from the Metro". It is 1 mile from Friendship Heights as the crow flies, and 1.5 miles via the current twisting road network."
11:52 AM
I think we can all agree that none of us travel by crow. (So who gives a beak that it's closest when you've got wings?!)
With all due respect: Quit tweaking the data. Anyone that google-maps the distance from Westbard Avenue to the Friendship Heights Metro Station will see 3 possible paths:
1. Via River Road, cutting through the parktrail to Willard. That's 1.6 miles.
2. Via Dorset Avenue. 1.8 miles.
3. Via River to Western, which is what I am used to walking. 1.9 miles. I wryly add that depending on which connection you've got at the Metro Station, by the time you board that'll round it to 2 miles.
But thank you for exemplifying the kind of impractical mindset that the County Council must be utilizing in order to justify that a walk from Westbard to the nearest Metro Station is actually a viable daily commute for anyone.
I would like to see each of the Councilmen that approved this non-solution to WALK to this easy commute from Westbard to the Metro Station in each of the four seasons: Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter.
Mr. Brach of Brach's Candies had an extremely well-run candy factory. Part of its success was that when Mr. Brach wanted to improve the line, he asked the workers how they would improve it and why. After all, they are the ones that operated the machinery and ran the show. They knew better than anyone if there were major flaws in floor design or if tweaking one particular aspect could make a lot more sense.
There are a lot of palatable sounding solutions on paper (love knowing the distance of a crow's flight. It is probably 1.1 miles for a chicken as they wobble.). Folks gloss and jimmy the data till it fits what they wanted to promote all along.
But those that have to actually utilize what is implemented will know acutely whether an idea was viable or just a crock of ... crowfeathers.
Call me crotchety, but I walk River Road in 4 seasons.
Sorry, Bob. Got riled up reading that crow crap that I went ahead and rankled without reading your sufficient, short response.
Thanks for being in touch with the reality of all the county commuters. This is one of many reasons I do trust your judgment over the crow counters making policies and "solutions" that just are not practical for real people. Kudos. Now let's all eat crow.
Hope we can all agree no one walks to friendship heights metro from "Westbard". There are a relative small number of folks taking the ride on bus there.
Ride-on and Metrobus are amazingly able to adjust to demand.
You look at the world as it is now. You should add to your consideration the ways it can be in the future.
There will be an expansion of bus service to Metro Rail once Westbard is done.
To think, and complain now, otherwise is just damn dumb.
7:49PM - You're crotchety. <-----as you requested ;)
"Although the zoning for the site allows a height of 75', the building is expected to be only 64'. That is intriguing, given that there are no single-family homes or townhomes immediately adjacent to the site. Yet here the Planning Board would approve only 64'. while it approved heights significantly taller than that directly across from single-family homes on Westbard Avenue and Ridgefield Road last year. Once again, it's amateur hour at the Planning Board."
This entire paragraph doesn't make any sense. In Westbard, if a developer decided to go stick-built instead of steel/concrete they would build in the 50-70' range as well. It doesn't matter if the zoning is 200' or 300'. LCOR is actually doing the same thing in White Flint right now--getting approval to build a low-rise 5-story apartment building adjacent to two 19-story high-rises in the same zone.
I'm the "as the crow flies" guy. The reason I keep mentioning that, is because the existing road network in and around Westbard provides such indirect routes for walking. Improved roadway alignment and new pedestrian paths providing more direct connections would shorten much of the walking distances within Westbard and between there and Friendship Heights.
Looking forward to Ken linking to this big development news! Go Ken!
BB: "The proposed apartment building would be up to 75 feet tall."
Robert Dyer: "Although the zoning for the site allows a height of 75', the building is expected to be only 64'. That is intriguing, given that there are no single-family homes or townhomes immediately adjacent to the site. Yet here the Planning Board would approve only 64'. while it approved heights significantly taller than that directly across from single-family homes on Westbard Avenue and Ridgefield Road last year. Once again, it's amateur hour at the Planning Board."
"Expected to be"... by whom? Did anyone actually say this?
Rule #17 - No fact-checking
12:32: It said 64' right in the Foulger-Pratt documents.
Post a Comment