Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too bad Janeese has promised to kill this plan if she’s elected (and she probably will be).

It’s hilarious to see the YIMBY mouth-breathers twist themselves into illogical knots trying to defend JLG when she says crap like this. She is not a YIMBY. Most of her proposals should make YIMBYs mad.

The YIMBY community, for the most part, sees through Janeese on this.

Then why has she been endorsed by every single YIMBY group?

She's still way better than McDuffie

[Anonymous]

Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

[Anonymous]

Who needs firefighters, teachers and front line workers living in the city? They can all commute from west virginia, no big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who needs firefighters, teachers and front line workers living in the city? They can all commute from west virginia, no big deal.

Those are government workers. You can pay them whatever is necessary. Then you collect taxes from them to pay the government workers who pay taxes to pay the government workers to pay...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who needs firefighters, teachers and front line workers living in the city? They can all commute from west virginia, no big deal.

We could use the tax dollars to pay them enough to live on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

I wasn’t aware that they voted on it, and the public seemed pretty against it at the meetings.

How was this decision so clearly made?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

I wasn’t aware that they voted on it, and the public seemed pretty against it at the meetings.

How was this decision so clearly made?

The ANC vote was a fait accompli.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

I wasn’t aware that they voted on it, and the public seemed pretty against it at the meetings.

How was this decision so clearly made?

The ANC vote was a fait accompli.

So the public didn’t get to decide, the decision was made for them. I know that the YIMBYs love to play both sides, if the public agrees with them then the public input is important, if the public doesn’t agree with them, then too bad, the democratic process was protected because they voted for people making the decisions even if the public disagrees now. Public input is SO IMPORTANT until it runs counter to their fancy and then there are 1000 excuses as to why it wasn’t valid or representative or something.

At least they are spreading the en$hittification around, maybe the rich folks will finally realize that they aren’t insulated from the outcomes of their votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

I wasn’t aware that they voted on it, and the public seemed pretty against it at the meetings.

How was this decision so clearly made?

you mean the same 20-30 people who show up at every meeting to complain about this? That isn't "the public pretty against it" it is a handful of cranks in a neighborhood of thousands of people. Even the unscientific polling that has been done shows an even split, and the elections show the people who live closest to it, support it. It is hard to understand why people who iive more than a mile away in ward 4 are so concerned about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc does not need anymore subsidized housing at all. It already has one of highest rates of subsidized housing anywhere in the country. More than any other state on a per capita basis in the entire US. It needs more market rate housing to balance out the budget and backfill the giant financial hole from downsizing federal government employment levels.

Any jobs for these new homeowners or are you just interested in the independently wealthy that don't need jobs?

There is plenty of market rate housing that is affordable to people that are employed. DC needs more balanced growth in order to support the funding required for the generous social services it currently provides. Continuing to require and approve such a large number of housing units for very low income people is a recipe for disaster if you want a functional government. Without balanced growth by income group this whole funding mechanism will collapse and the quality of public services will deteriorate.

80% AMI is not "very low income" people. I mean, this is not a homeless shelter being proposed in Chevy Chase, despite the crying from the NIMBYs.

I’m saying nothing about this specific development income threshold, I’m saying that forcing high density development on communities that don’t want it is symptomatic of DCs overall political dysfunction where people seem to know what is best for everyone else, but themselves.

the proposed development in Chevy Chase is a whopping ten feet higher than what is there currently, with more usable greenspace on the ground. It is public space, so the public writ large gets to decide how to use it, not a few NIMBYs who are on a twit because they don't want "the poors" begriming their neighborhood.

I wasn’t aware that they voted on it, and the public seemed pretty against it at the meetings.

How was this decision so clearly made?

The ANC vote was a fait accompli.

So the public didn’t get to decide, the decision was made for them. I know that the YIMBYs love to play both sides, if the public agrees with them then the public input is important, if the public doesn’t agree with them, then too bad, the democratic process was protected because they voted for people making the decisions even if the public disagrees now. Public input is SO IMPORTANT until it runs counter to their fancy and then there are 1000 excuses as to why it wasn’t valid or representative or something.

At least they are spreading the en$hittification around, maybe the rich folks will finally realize that they aren’t insulated from the outcomes of their votes.

public input is pretty evenly split by every unscientific poll offered by the ANC and public feedback garnered by the city. Where do you get the idea what everyone is opposed to it? Maybe you need to get out of your bubble?