I went to the Home Depot the other day, which was unnecessary... I need to go to the Apartment Depot, which is just a big warehouse with people standing around saying "hey, we ain't gotta fix s***!"

-Mitch Hedberg

by Alex B. on Oct 21, 2008 3:06 pm • link • report

Random question... are they ever going to redevelop the massive Geico campus in Friendship Heights? It must have 20 acres of land, and one of the ugliest buildings in the entire metro area (guarantee NIMBYs will try to landmark it). For that matter, the metro bus garage must take up an additional 4 acres of prime TOD-ready land.

by SG on Oct 21, 2008 4:31 pm • link • report

SG- Are your assumptions and name-calling really necessary? A plan for redevelopment of the 26-acre GEICO campus was approved quite some time ago. That plan has over 1.5 million square feet of space, including over 500 housing units. GEICO recently requested and got an extension of the approval. The bus garage is on approximately 3 acres. A development of approximately 330,000 square feet would be allowed on that site.

by Tom on Oct 21, 2008 4:58 pm • link • report

I have a friend who has a business taking care of indoor plants. Can i give her your email address? Also, my Cleveland Park contractor is an artist who makes money renovating kitchens, etc and his painting quality is top-notch.

by Bianchi on Oct 21, 2008 5:34 pm • link • report

Bianchi: Absolutely, though I should clarify (and just edited the post to clarify) that it's outdoor plants I need planted and watered, and the outside of the house I need painted.

by David Alpert on Oct 21, 2008 5:39 pm • link • report

I used Blue Door painters in Arlington to paint the exterior of my Mt. Pleasant row house last year and they did a really nice job. I plan to use them again for some interior painting this fall.

by Spence on Oct 21, 2008 8:55 pm • link • report

Tom, if you think that generic term, not levied at anyone in particular, is "name-calling", then I don't know what to say. I'm not going to apologize for it. I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say there would be an attempt to landmark that hideous non-historic building in order to impede attempted development... which yes, would be NIMBY at its core because it's blatant misusing and cheapening a serious and critical preservation tool (landmarking).

And for the record, I grew up and family still lives in the area in question... Irrelevant, I know, but I also know of many such scenarios in the area over the years. I also will say that Friendship Heights is night and day better than it was in my childhood by embracing TOD and density, so kudos to all involved!

by SG on Oct 22, 2008 12:26 am • link • report

With the exception of the beige tower, I don't find the GEICO building unforgivable. If they redeveloped the parking lots, it would add to the architectural diversity of the area. Up close, it's details are surprisingly humane. If they applied a grid to the area, a perimeter road around the building would create a great contrast in street architecture.

Across the street, Lord and Taylor's, its garage, and the Mazza parking lot and the awful building at 4400 Jenifer could be leveled and rebuilt. Same with the new Macy's: tear that pile down now before it's etched into my psyche.

The same goes for the WMATA garage: save the facade for something else and build that up.

by The King of Spain on Oct 22, 2008 12:49 am • link • report

The area associated with the Lord & Taylor parking lot is going to be redeveloped into a low scale, matter of right development. It is my guess that the owners didn't want to deal with the neighborhood, so they are going to do something cheap and temporary so something better can be efficiently produced down the road.

by William on Oct 22, 2008 6:47 am • link • report

William, Lord & Taylor withdrew their Application to the BZA for approval to redevelop that parking lot because of market conditions. You can check the BZA web-site. If you read the Current article about that project, you would have realized that the reason for the proposed scale, clearly temporary as you describe but not matter of right, was that they do not own the land, but have a 17-year lease.

King, Not sure where the “new Macy’s” that you refer to is. There is no Macy’s in the Friendship Heights area, new or old. You can find an early version of what is approved for the GEICO site on the Montgomery County web-site.

SG, I don’t quite understand why you consider generic, uninformed name-calling, assuming, counterfactually, that others will behave in some way which you consider undesirable, to be acceptable. It is not.

by Tom on Oct 22, 2008 8:11 am • link • report

A large part of the attraction of this area has been it's up-close suburban ease. For example, the Lord and Taylor has a wonderful parking garage where you can literally park within a 100 feet of the men's department doors. It's great that they've added all the stores they have just north of the line, but they need to be careful not to throw out what has been there draw in adding new stores. The Geico land gives the opportunity to add more stores ... but if they want to retain what is their uniqueness in this area, they need to be extra careful that all this is done with great care as they have done thus far. The last thing we need is another "downtown" here. If it becomes that, then people will just stay in the real downtown to shop .... and this area risks becoming an overbuilt "dollar store" shopping center with low rent tenants filling up the space. Again, so far the extra development has been done with care, but they shouldn't sacrifice their "suburban ease" to squeeze out more rents ... 'cause in the end we'll all end up with less and not more.

by Lance on Oct 22, 2008 8:15 am • link • report

I stand corrected Tom, thank you.

by William on Oct 22, 2008 9:22 am • link • report

Anyone know what retail is going in at Wisconsin Place other than Whole Foods? It would be great if they put some restaurants in. That area needs some post-8 pm vibrancy.

by SG on Oct 22, 2008 9:57 am • link • report