Comments on: Board Approves Bergmann’s Redevelopment

By: nemesis

nemesis — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:15:13 +0000

I actually attended the Planning Commission Hearing in November. From what I learned there, the developer got 30 of 41 members of that civic association, most of whom live on the NE side of I-66, to swallow everything including the 10 + stories because they wanted to shop and didn’t like to see the boarded up houses as they drove past them over the bridge to home. They also won’t have to endure any of the traffic/parking problems because the site is not actually in those member’s neighborhood, i.e., on their side of I-66, where most of the higher priced owner occupied housing is. Apparently, that civic association treats the SW side of I-66 as the wrong side of the tracks where it’s fine to build anything so long as it’s a convenience to them. It also seems that the civic association wasn’t bothered enough about the decaying boarded up buildings on the wrong side of the tracks to do anything about it during the 10-12 years they’ve been that way. They sounded as if they were on the developer’s staff.

The other 11 members live on the wrong side of the tracks, i.e., SW side of I-66, where most of the apartments and condos are. They and most on that side liked the building with the grocery but not the height of the tower and wanted improvements to the intersection and signals for pedestrian and traffic safety and a contribution to improve the park across the street. And, from reading this article, the developer is now providing those items.

By: highriser

highriser — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 01:03:59 +0000

That site just across the bridge over I-66 between 21st St N and Lee Highway/I-66 is in its own little world too with nearly identical site and location attributes. All it lacks is boarded up houses which can easily be remedied.

By: highriser

highriser — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:56:52 +0000

Bergmann’s strategy of boarding up those houses and letting his laundry building go to hell to get support from neighbors for development up zoning proposals is the oldest trick in the books but it worked on this neighborhood. Where was their civic association while these houses were rotting for years? Why didn’t they take action through the county to get them torn down? Why didn’t they do anything when Bergmann’s pulled the facade off the back of their building to make it look shabbier?

By: highriser

highriser — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:21:48 +0000

Uncanny how that site is situated exactly like Bergmann’s. It’s even got some vacant county and V-Dot property the developer could spruce up to enhance his development. I’d include the apartment building on the east end and add a third high-rise. I’d also put in the biggest grocery I could fit, perhaps a Wegman’s, of at least 80,000 sq. ft. Groceries are excluded from density calculations so if your apartments average 900 sq. ft., that means you could build an additional 88 apartments. The Board would bend over backwards to approve it due to the additional sales tax it would bring in. That little MOM’s store is really a speciality natural foods store that doesn’t directly compete. Add some affordable housing units and LEED Gold to get the maximum density and you’re right up at ten stories where the views would be magnificent.

By: nemesis

nemesis — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:00:05 +0000

No need to offer discounts. Just buy a few units and board them up; the rest will soon sell. Board those up too as you go. The N Highlands Civic Assn will approve whatever you want to replace them.

By: Sparky

Sparky — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:05:14 +0000

With the precedent set, the next major high rise/mixed use development in North Highlands may be the area between Lee Highway/I-66 and 21st St. N (a major arterial) from N Smythe St to N Troy St. This site has the same location attributes as the Bergmann’s site. At 162,000 sq ft., it’s twice the size and suitable for at least 2 high rises the size of the one to be built on the Bergmann’s site. The county will net at least $4 million (based on what McCaffery paid for vacating 20th St N) from a developer by vacating the adjacent stubs of N Smythe and N Troy and the block of 20th Rd near the Custis Trail. Those streets aren’t needed for the street grid when that site is developed. The developer would need to provide access to the Custis Trail from 21St St N and would have the same opportunities for improving the trail as there were at the Bergmann’s site. A real grocery, cafes and other retail on the ground floor could front the 21st N side to serve the needs of both N Highlands and Rosslyn residents. Scott St to N 21st St would provide easy access for Rosslyn shoppers. The intersection and lights at N Veitch will already have been improved to accommodate access to the development from the west as a result of the Bergmann’s site development. Those 1940s duplexes are tiny, about the size of a one bedroom apartment, and not the best use of property in such a prime location. The developer might offer a discount on condos to them as an incentive to sell.

By: moredensityplease

moredensityplease — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:58:42 +0000

Good points, but I think the increased property values are what creates the higher taxes. Population density is also different than “job density”. Rosslyn, the Courthouse area, and DC have a lot of job density. Much of that can be supported by adjacent housing density that would help reduce the traffic loads and possibly some of the people using Metro. For example, if the new development next to the Rosslyn station is supposed to provide around 1000 new jobs, then wouldn’t it be ideal for a decent percentage of those people to live within a 15 minute walk radius? I don’t think density is so bad, especially when I consider that this Rosslyn example alone would otherwise cause a lot of these 1000 example people to live in more automobile-centric areas OR stack up in even more of Arlington’s (and DC’s and Alexandria’s) lower-density townhouse developments. When a 1-family townhouse is rented out to 3 renters (often with 3 cars), a lot more ripples go through our urban ponds than what would have otherwise been caused by a few more tall buildings.
By the way, a 7-story building is “tall” just like an 11-story building. Has anyone walked around Rosslyn before and said “Wow, these buildings should all be just 3 or 4 stories lower…”?

By: Sparky

Sparky — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 03:33:40 +0000

Potomac Towers, built in 1961 on over 7 acres, could not be built today because zoning ordinances were changed in the 1970s to prohibit tall building along Lee Highway. The Waverly Civic Association, in their letter to the Board objecting to the 10 + story height, said, “Since the inception of the Rosslyn-Ballston Metro Corridor on 12/7/1974, with amendments in the 1980’s, the County continuously told neighborhoods that the tall buildings of the Rosslyn-Ballston Metro Corridor were based on the positive linkage with mass transit and that density would not ‘creep’ into adjacent residential areas, i.e., heights would taper down, nor would the Metro Corridor definition be redefined to expand the width of the corridor. The current Development Goals of the GLUP are to concentrate high-density residential, commercial and office within the Metro Corridor. ” For the Bergmann’s development, the Board up zoned 5 small single-family home lots (R-5) and commercial property (C-2) where Bergmann’s is currently. The Board has now broken that promise to neighborhoods and set a new precedent for 10 + story buildings along Lee Highway. Additional developments would need to go through the approval process but the County would now be hard pressed to legally deny a proposal just because it is 10 + stories.

By: karzai

karzai — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:48:52 +0000

Thank goodness the Board approved this. This will bring vibrancy to what is now a rundown, underutilized eyesore of a little enclave. Very welcome indeed..

By: Say it Ain't So

Say it Ain't So — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 01:01:02 +0000

You don’t drive do you addict?