The new apartment building on the site of the demolished Christ Lutheran Church at 8011 Old Georgetown Road in Bethesda now has a name. "Cecil Apartments" is the official branding, although there does not appear to be a website for the property online yet. The Cecil will use 8015 Old Georgetown as its official address. Holding 310 apartment units, The Cecil is expected to welcome its first residents later this year.
29 comments:
That cream colored brick, combined with the greenish grey siding are not a very nice combination.
Will this caper still have the large BETHESDA letters on the the Old Georgetown facade?
Just like the East-West Highway McDonald’s a decade ago - we were promised a new Lutheran worship space within this development.
The Bethesda Bait-and-Switch once again.
Not a big Micky-Dee's fan but that was a nice spot to sit and talk with a friend. And they took Madelaine's away too. Ceremony is nice when the weather is warm I guess. What it the current sit and talk with a friend spot in Bethesda?
Learning
I watched this go up. The upper floors of this building were constructed with wood framing and sheathing. Is that a fire hazard?
"Cecil? What kind of name is that?" ~Never anything JAC would say even though it is a bit odd because it's a white name.
7:34 you must love the anonymity!
If you think McDonald's is a nice place to sit and chat then you can make anywhere work. Coffee shops, fast casual restaurants, bars, etc.
Because what we really need is another bland, generic, mixed use, over priced, half empty, high-rise in Bethesda 🏢
4:54PM - That is a typical construction method where the first floor or two are concrete, known as a podium, and the upper floors are wood. No fire hazard if built to code. It’s also known as mass timber. The tallest is 25 stories. The elevator shaft and stairwells are also concrete.
Yes we really do need more housing in downtown Bethesda, especially projects like this that provide at least 15% affordable MPDU units. And I can assure you that these new towers are not 50% empty. Our apartment building with about 160 units currently has only 3 available apartments. Most others that I track are nearly as full.
I do not disagree that the Cecil is a bit bland, but the upper five floors of wood framed construction do keep the construction cost as low as possible. And to respond to another post, all new apartments in Bethesda are required to include fire sprinklers, so they are not unsafe. The sound isolation between floors is not as robust in wood framed buildings, but it does save cost, and theoretically creates more affordable housing options.
The Cecil does have some nice building massing, and includes some nice stepped massing near the single family neighbors. This project is much better than many projects that build a parking deck and wrap it with an apartments to create a big rectangular box with very little relief other than a very color and material changes.
I think it will be a nice gateway into downtown Bethesda, coming into town from the west. Certainly better than a vacant church. It’s also commendable that no “naturally occurring” affordable housing was removed for this project, at least compared to the projects proposed along Battery Lane.
Baskin Robbins is a good place to sit and talk, also the seating near Neuhaus in Bethesda Row, or Fish Taco, or Potbelly or 5 guys, or the frozen yogurt on Elm, or the bench by the car dealer on Bethesda Ave.
@1:48 Thanks for your comments. I have mixed feelings (at best) about the extensive development in downtown Bethesda, especially plans to go beyond the approved max of about 35 million NEW square feet in the 2017 Plan, which have already been reached.
And yes, in the end, a couple of hundred “naturally occurring” affordable housing units will likely be eliminated based on the projects proposed along Battery Lane alone. I have a real issue with that given the excessive bloated prices of units in new buildings. The 15% allotment is woefully inadequate; even if 25% of a new building's units are under the affordable housing program, too many current residents are being displaced, and many will not be able to afford to live here once the new buildings are completed.
Thanks. Some folks complain about buildings made out of popsicle sticks and bubble gum.. But as long as they knew what they were doing I also read it should be safe. https://www.dezeen.com/2023/03/22/mass-timber-fire-safety-timber-revolution/
I'm an architect, and I am really shuddering at all this "mass timber" talk. It's so funny you all are "reading about" stuff and wondering if things are safe.
Mass timber is a standard option for construction. It is standardized in its structural capacities, its life safety requirements, and is fully regulated under the code required construction types that regulate so much more than anyone who doesn't do this for a living would know.
Anything being constructed has been designed by professionals who are required by law to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public and are then reviewed and signed off by code officials who would go to prison if they accepted bad design.
But your wikipedia research is important? c'mon. Cut it out with the internet expertise on everything, RFK jr.
Stop already. Your armchair architecting is kinda ridiculous.
Understand the difference between light construction and common commercial high-rises is that most fire events treat those structures differently. Sure both are built to code with fire suppression but know that water can be every bit if not more destructive than the fire itself. Small fires aside, a major event renders the stick-frame structure 100% destroyed by water assuming it was controlled in time.
Cecil County...
100% destroyed by water? Tell us you don't know what you're talking about without telling us you don't know what you're talking about.
7:10 is ignorance on display. How much water does it take to destroy a light-construction building? Answer: Less than the water necessary to put out a fire larger than a 2-alarm call.
I'm an architect and a former volunteer firefighter. You're very wrong. Stop embarrassing yourself.
441 is actually a keyboard warrior wannabe firefighter as you can call any station that handles high-rise calls and one of the full-time professional firefighters will set you straight.
Keyboard warrior, I like that description! I'm also an architect with 30 years experience and licensed in 7 states, and a former volunteer firefighter (got too old sadly). Guessing you arent either of those, are ya, Sunshine? Keep embarrassing yourself, see if I care!
@2:57 Explain what you're talking about if you think you have a good point. There's been light construction, wood framed homes and businesses, that have been completely submerged by floods that don't melt or whatever nonsense you're talking about, they are aired out and rebuilt using the same wood framing... how exactly does water 'destroy'? You just saying the same thing over and over without any explanation of WHAT is the damage, WHY is the damage, HOW is the damage, is just really really unintelligent.
Do you mean the impact force of firehoses? Do you mean mold? Do you mean water melts wood??? ... I don't know wtf you mean. I don't think YOU know what you mean.
135/450 is obviously triggered and though say "see if I care" actually thinks posting internet credibility makes their opinions more relevant. In short, residential and commercial are two different animals in that residential will almost always be in reach of equipment, (most architects would know this but perhaps age is a memory factor here). Listing credentials in an anonymous blog won't actually make any difference. Especially when you're wrong but I digress.
Any FD that runs high-rise calls knows which buildings are masonry or light-construction and run drills differently. The amount of water used does make a difference and a light-construction building over 7/8 floors that has a major fire event becomes an inferno due to the chimney effect, (do they not teach this in schools anymore?). Fun fact that some of the older condominiums, (used to be apartments), along Connecticut Ave in DC had wood burning fireplaces, (all those are masonry). Understand that I'm not claiming that one is more likely to perish in one or the other but the damage will be starkly different and I personally would prefer not to live above the 5th floor of a light-construction building.
Final point: If light-construction high-rise condominium buildings are no different than their masonry twins, why do insurance companies charge significantly more for a H06 fire policy?
You said "WATER can be as or more destructive than fire", and now you're explaining how fire works to a person who designs high rise buildings and has fought fires. You're just a very confused person, have a great day.
The fact that an "architect" fails to understand the damage water can do to a stick frame structure is concerning. Everyone else does including your insurance company.
There's an old saying in the trades that if one needs to constantly remind everyone about their expertise, they are the problem.
There's an old saying in life that if you havent yet explained what you mean after 15 mindless posts, you may not know what you mean. You spewed nonsense and then couldn't back it up.
"Trades"... that tells me everything. You're a nail pounder, frustrated at your expertise in manual labor, but not so bright in science. You think you salt of the earth people know better than well, everyone, but especially studied learned people. You just "know" things, spew it with no science or backup. What do I know, actually being licensed by 7 states to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, with requirements of continual learning in building science, right?!
I respect the expertise of trades people in constructibility like yourself. I run up against your kind that dont give mutual respect to architects who actually study building science all the time. Good day.
What was that about repeatedly pointing out so-called "expertise"? Working in the trades was during college. Pointing out where one is off the rails with simple common sense? Priceless
You better tell insurance companies that their loss risk-acessments are all wrong.
Post a Comment