Comments on: It’s Fillmore or bust, says music-hall developer

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:49:21 +0000

Actually, I’m told that in at least one case, the owner doesn’t even live in this country. Can’t say how old he is. :-) But, yes, there are multiple owners on that block, which is one reason why it’s been hard to get some sort of comprehensive redevelopment.

And don’t get me started on the “historic” preservation . . .

By: Woodsider

Woodsider — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 01:06:38 +0000

Of course the owners (”elderly individuals”) are to blame. They can work within the restrictions of the historical designation just like the owners of the block caty-corner did (the one with American Apparel). That renovation was expensive but they completely replaced the tenant mix in teh process and it looks fantastic.

On a shoestring budget, the owners of the block with the JC Penney could make drastic improvements if they would replace and unify the canopies, simplify the color variety, freshen the logos and for goodness sake, get the tenants to clean the crap off their storefronts. It might not be the perfect solution but it would make a tremendous improvment that would bring in customers. I’d put my money that these “elderly owners” are waiting for a bailout from MoCo or waiting for a developer to buy them all out and fund their retirement. If they are as conservative as the Lee family, we’ll all retire before seeing any changes.

By: Silver Surge

Silver Surge — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:20:20 +0000

Oh, and about that hot pink canopy at the corner of Fenton and Colesville – T-mobile actually wanted to make that storefront a lot different than it looks now. Remember that for a while they had walled up that corner building for construction? Well the historical society stopped that pretty quickly. They put a STOP-ORDER on their construction because they were altering a historically deemed structure. So the best T-mobile could get away with was to put a new canopy to try to hide the hideous storefront of these old buildings.

Editor’s note: This person’s screen name has been modified. — JD (Aug 4, 2008)

By: Silver Surge

Silver Surge — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:17:37 +0000

The owners of that run down strip of shops between the JC Penny and the Lee building are are elderly individuals – and they aren’t to blame for the way it looks. The local historical society has deemed those structures ‘historical’ – therefore they can’t be changed. There was actually a plan to remodel the first 3 storefronts next to the Lee Building into a more presentable, modern facade but the historical society stepped in and said No. Apart from that, they don’t provide any funding for any maintenance of these ‘historical’ facades. Ridiculous, don’t you think?

Editor’s note: This person’s screen name has been modified. — JD (Aug 4, 2008)

By: Woodsider

Woodsider — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:15:33 +0000

Thanks for the clarification…so who does own them? Are they all individually owned or as a block?
The same criticism applies regardless of ownership.

We should start a grassroots campaign to get the owner(s) to clean up shop. They need to know the community wants better (than a new hot pink canopy) for the whole stretch. It’s no different than in nice neighborhood where one homeowner keeps a pickup in the font yard on blocks and never mows his grass.

By: Jennifer Deseo

Jennifer Deseo — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:41:08 +0000

Sorry to do this to you, Woodsider, but here goes: Lee doesn’t own those storefronts. What he does own are the Lee Plaza building, the JC Penney site, and the parking lot behind those storefronts along Colesville.

By: Woodsider

Woodsider — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:19:15 +0000

Who owns the strip of languishing retail/restaurants on the north side of Colesville? Is it Lee?

If so, then how can he in all seriousness say “I hate the way it looks”? That’s freaking absurd–he is responsible for the way it looks. Perhaps if the Lee Company sunk some money into cleaning up the existing storefronts he’d have his share of quality tenants who want to move in (i’m not referring to the JC Penney bldg). At minimum, he could raise rents for the existing tenants because of the curb appeal improvements which usually translate to more foot traffic/revenue.

Between the awful kaleidoscopic canopy collection (how’s that for alliteration), the shitty signage and the endless crap filling up every glass storefront it’s no wonder the area looks so bad. I’m not saying we shouldn’t move forward with the Fillmore and provide incentive to the Lee’s, but to suggest the area looks so awful because we don’t have a Fillmore agreement is pure nonesense.

Mr. Lee: you have to spend money to make money. Surely you have enough in your reserves to clean up the fronts of those buildings yourself.

By: Thayer-D

Thayer-D — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:22:39 +0000

Man, who’s holding this thing up!!!

A: What’s the difference between holding a 15 or 18 year limit on how to develope their own property?
Dosen’t the planning board realize that the chances of the parking lot getting developed are vastly improved if this
project get’s completed? More people, more buisness, better chances of development?

B: And why does anyone think the flood gates will be laid open if they give them a slide on the (outdated) public-use
requirements? What slides did they give the Ellsworth Promenade project to allow that to go through,
demolishing the beautiful and historic armory?

Unfortunatley, some compromises will have to be made. I would rather rally around the beautiful “main street” portion of Georgia Avenue, between Sligo, and Bonifant than worry about what a developer wants to put in a parking lot surrounded by ugly high rises.

By: paul_silver_spring

paul_silver_spring — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:59:24 +0000

“Or we can always do this the old-fashioned way and put in a pocket park,” [Lee] quipped.

Hahahaha, at least someone realizes how ridiculous those concrete slabs with 2 benches all over downtown are getting.