Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty clear that the survey has way oversampled single family homeowners and as well as those over 60. In other words, this is pretty meaningless given the overall demographics of that area.

This is the demographics of that area...

Let people decide what happens in their backyard. Homeowners should also have a greater say given all the property tax that is collected from their homes..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

Here's an article with the photo:
https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/194850

I'm well aware of what you're talking about. A few victorious ANC commissioners who look to be slightly inebriated flipping off a sign that's for people against safer streets. Seems reasonable to me! Still is you beating a dead horse.

Just a friendly reminder of our "leadership." The poster of the tweet ran unopposed as did most of the ANC 3C commissioners. This is not a resounding endorsement of either the bike lanes, housing density or the GGW agenda. And it's a literal F U to local businesses. Reminder everyone: elections matter.

This thread is about 3/4G and affordable housing in a particular building. Quit trying to drag it away from that and into other nimby-circlejerk topics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty clear that the survey has way oversampled single family homeowners and as well as those over 60. In other words, this is pretty meaningless given the overall demographics of that area.

This is the demographics of that area...

Let people decide what happens in their backyard. Homeowners should also have a greater say given all the property tax that is collected from their homes..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

Here's an article with the photo:
https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/194850

I'm well aware of what you're talking about. A few victorious ANC commissioners who look to be slightly inebriated flipping off a sign that's for people against safer streets. Seems reasonable to me! Still is you beating a dead horse.

Just a friendly reminder of our "leadership." The poster of the tweet ran unopposed as did most of the ANC 3C commissioners. This is not a resounding endorsement of either the bike lanes, housing density or the GGW agenda. And it's a literal F U to local businesses. Reminder everyone: elections matter.

This thread is about 3/4G and affordable housing in a particular building. Quit trying to drag it away from that and into other nimby-circlejerk topics.

Bro, stay in your lane. This a mom's blog. We can talk about whatever we want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

I'm confused. You're saying that only the people literally in the immediate vicinity of the community center should get a say? So then I guess the 715 people who responded to the survey from SMD 03 and 04 should just bugger off with their east of broad branch opinions and the 767 ones from 02 and 01 should just really get bent with their east of Utah Ave -selves?

It’s really bizarre that you’re so fixated on this survey. Just realizing that all your Millennial urbanist buddies have moved away, or got married, made babies and left for the suburbs, leaving you in a community of octogenarians and voucher holders? Have fun with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

I'm confused. You're saying that only the people literally in the immediate vicinity of the community center should get a say? So then I guess the 715 people who responded to the survey from SMD 03 and 04 should just bugger off with their east of broad branch opinions and the 767 ones from 02 and 01 should just really get bent with their east of Utah Ave -selves?

It’s really bizarre that you’re so fixated on this survey. Just realizing that all your Millennial urbanist buddies have moved away, or got married, made babies and left for the suburbs, leaving you in a community of octogenarians and voucher holders? Have fun with that.

Exactly, this dude has parachuted into our site to try to do some sort of building density advocacy. He should go mansplain somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Even if true, a lot has changed in five years. The voucher fiasco, crime spiraling, DC’s tepid response. No one trusts DC to manage this well for the community.

The proposed housing is not voucher housing. Why do you assume people who want to live in affordable housing cause crime? This housing is designed for people who work at Broadbrnach Market or at the fire station down the street, or at Lafayette as a teacher or building engineer. Do you think those people are engaged in the crime spree?

Why are we building apartments for the Chevy Chase MARYLAND fire department? While I appreciate that Maryland covers us in DC perhaps it might be better to build a fire or police station of our own.

Fessenden and CT is your friend.

So is knowing that BCC and Chevy Chase cover part of that area. The world does not revolve Cleveland Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Even if true, a lot has changed in five years. The voucher fiasco, crime spiraling, DC’s tepid response. No one trusts DC to manage this well for the community.

The proposed housing is not voucher housing. Why do you assume people who want to live in affordable housing cause crime? This housing is designed for people who work at Broadbrnach Market or at the fire station down the street, or at Lafayette as a teacher or building engineer. Do you think those people are engaged in the crime spree?

Why are we building apartments for the Chevy Chase MARYLAND fire department? While I appreciate that Maryland covers us in DC perhaps it might be better to build a fire or police station of our own.

Fessenden and CT is your friend.

So is knowing that BCC and Chevy Chase cover part of that area. The world does not revolve Cleveland Park.

???

Fessenden Street is part of the broader Chevy Chase neighborhood. First responders who work there could walk to work from this new building. I don't even understand your point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

I’m sure you would care if it was a homeless shelter.

But that isn't what is being proposed, is it, now.

In your post you said you “couldn’t care less” what is built on top of a new community center. We all know that isn’t true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

I'm confused. You're saying that only the people literally in the immediate vicinity of the community center should get a say? So then I guess the 715 people who responded to the survey from SMD 03 and 04 should just bugger off with their east of broad branch opinions and the 767 ones from 02 and 01 should just really get bent with their east of Utah Ave -selves?

It’s really bizarre that you’re so fixated on this survey. Just realizing that all your Millennial urbanist buddies have moved away, or got married, made babies and left for the suburbs, leaving you in a community of octogenarians and voucher holders? Have fun with that.

Exactly, this dude has parachuted into our site to try to do some sort of building density advocacy. He should go mansplain somewhere else.

He got tired of talking to himself over on MoCo YIMBY so came here for a little bit of needed attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

OK...but that literally only happened in like the last 3-6 months. The point is that most people think that a voucher rate is below (most probably think well below) market rates, which has not been the case in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents
That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents to crony landlords? Doesn’t DC have the obligation or at least some responsibility to recoup the excess rents paid on violation of federal law? Shouldn’t the DC attorney general pursue this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents
That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents to crony landlords? Doesn’t DC have the obligation or at least some responsibility to recoup the excess rents paid on violation of federal law? Shouldn’t the DC attorney general pursue this?

Vouchers are booming because it allows landlords to increase the ceiling for rent stabilized units that were below whatever they determine to be prevailing market rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents
That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

As it was against federal law, does DC have an obligation for reimbursing the Feds for any federal funds used to pay super premium rents to crony landlords? Doesn’t DC have the obligation or at least some responsibility to recoup the excess rents paid on violation of federal law? Shouldn’t the DC attorney general pursue this?

Vouchers are booming because it allows landlords to increase the ceiling for rent stabilized units that were below whatever they determine to be prevailing market rate.

Also not true, the rent-control loopholes were closed years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

I'm confused. You're saying that only the people literally in the immediate vicinity of the community center should get a say? So then I guess the 715 people who responded to the survey from SMD 03 and 04 should just bugger off with their east of broad branch opinions and the 767 ones from 02 and 01 should just really get bent with their east of Utah Ave -selves?

It’s really bizarre that you’re so fixated on this survey. Just realizing that all your Millennial urbanist buddies have moved away, or got married, made babies and left for the suburbs, leaving you in a community of octogenarians and voucher holders? Have fun with that.

So confused. The survey makes it seem like the community here is split around this topic. There's not a clear majority.