Soldiers Home Development Proposal

The Washington Business Journal reports in "Military retiree center wants developers for 125 acres" that the Armed Forces Retirement Home "plans to lease nearly half its 276-acre Northwest campus to private developers as its seeks to add perhaps 8.7 million square feet of residences, retail and office space just west of The Catholic University of America. The federally owned retirement community, which houses about 1,000 veterans, says it no longer needs those 125 acres and wants to make money off the land. It will ask developers to submit bids of interest this fall. "

From the United Neighborhood Coalition in the Petworth neighborhood--

The complete Soldiers Home development draft Environmental Impact Statement is downloadable but this is a 16 MB file that can make for avery slow download.

FYI, individual chapters (easier to download and navigate) are hosted at the United Neighborhood Coalition website. Just click on "Click here for the draft Soldiers Home EIS" below the main page's "Welcome!" message.

Chapter 2 has the best information for a basic understanding of the proposed development -- look at the maps and tables. Note that just parcel/zone 6 (the parcel just two blocks from the Georgia Ave.-Petworth Metro station) is slated for up to 1,000,000 sq. ft. of development -- equivalent to 500 new rowhouses! -- up to 8 stories high and with more than 1,000 parking spaces.

Our first real community meeting on this issue is from7:00 to 8:30 p.m. Wednesday (6/15) at MPD's ROC North-- 801 Shepherd St., NW -- in Room 245. The public hearing on the draft EIS will be at the Soldiers Home on June 22. See http://www.afrhdevelopment.com/ for more about the hearing -- public participation is IMPORTANT!

_________
In response to the WBJ article, someone wrote this on the Columbia Heights email list:

I think a blance can be struck, with somre green space and some commercial/ residential development. It's certainly not a bad thing. Of course, I know how some people freak out when the word "development" is used. Bringing tourism to that area is great, too. Let people from out of town spend their money in DC!

Jim Weiner wrote this in response, and surprisingly he got a number of responses saying he is a bitter, mean person:

That's right. Some of us bristle at "development" as an unqualified, unquestioned good. For example, "development" to "solve" problems that a sane and sustainable federal policy towards veterans used to address, but no longer do (hey, got to pay for those massive tax cuts, corporate give-aways, and our state of perma-war)

Great. Another sell-off of green space for development (just what we need: more condos and stores). What's next: Rock Creek Park?

Let's see. Because potential developers are salivating over the money they'll make, this is automatically good thing? Buzzards salivate over carrion too.

I don't see any "balance" when green space is being irrevocably gobbled up. I see shortsightedness and erosion. I also see a legacy of gross irresponsibility that future generations will rue. Why not a wildlife refuge? Or at least multi-use green space. Oh, I guess that isn't "highest and best use." Excuse me.

A couple more stores and condos will drive tourism? Give me a break. Our city is for sale in a joint federal-local conspiracy to undermine any notion of the public trust. And you're happy about it.

This photo on the above-mentioned website doesn't do a very good job communicating about development of the Soldiers Home site in DC.