Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a bunch of bloated bs. Two points are made and neither are about lies. 1 is objection to inferring anything from the survey because someone thinks only a percentage of respondents doesn’t reflect a majority view. Not a lie. An opinion. The other is a technical question about the use of the word surplus and again no lies. Just a bunch a verbiage. The question about green space really needs to be fleshed out. Will the rooftop have astroturf. ?? Is a real park being replaced by a rooftop park with no trees or real green. This needs to be determined. I hope someone with some real data can respond to this last question because the rest is just bs to have the last word. If someone understands the actual green space issue it would be good to hear from them only.

the question about greenspace has been asked and answered a thousand times. the new development has MORE greenspace than what is currently there. That is what happens when you eliminate a surface parking lot.

Eliminating the parking lot was the aspect that the neighborhood was most overwhelmingly against.

No matter how many times the question was asked. No matter how many times the phrasing was changed. That was the one thing the entire neighborhood was adamantly against.

So you admit there is more greenspace, thank you.

In terms of surface parking, it is the least efficient use of space to store cars on asphalt and have it sit empty 15 hours a day. Face it, boomers love their cars and expect to be able to drive and park for free everywhere. Sorry, those days are over.

Plastic may be colored green but it's not greenspace.

Stay in your Ward 6 lane and stop meddling in areas you don't live. We want our library, community center, basketball/tennis/pickleball court, native garden, cherry trees and small parking lot. It's a sick sad joke that you're trying to claim a plastic roof lawn on top of a private apartment building as public green space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

That’s the thing: the people who are clamoring the loudest for this project to move forward don’t live in Ward 3/4 and never will. They don’t understand that people don’t want to take an elevator to a comically diminished outdoor space that’s just a glorified patch of astroturf. They don’t want their current outdoor space replaced by a Compass Coffee, a slop-bowl emporium and a sit down restaurant with a terrible concept that will fail within six months. They want apartments that families can live in, not the glorified dorms for privileged mediocrities that are all the rage, which is the plan here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

The "surveys" from the ANC and city show the numbers are relatively even between project opponents and proponents. Yes, there is a high level of opposition, but there is also a high level of support. There isn't one voice that "speaks for the community"

And, she ran on a platform of adding housing. Opposing this development would undermine credibility with her core supporters city-wide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

That’s the thing: the people who are clamoring the loudest for this project to move forward don’t live in Ward 3/4 and never will. They don’t understand that people don’t want to take an elevator to a comically diminished outdoor space that’s just a glorified patch of astroturf. They don’t want their current outdoor space replaced by a Compass Coffee, a slop-bowl emporium and a sit down restaurant with a terrible concept that will fail within six months. They want apartments that families can live in, not the glorified dorms for privileged mediocrities that are all the rage, which is the plan here.

The people who are most opposed to this project don't live within a mile of it. Meanwhile there are hundreds of not thousands of supporters who live in the immediate single member districts.

I don't get where you have data that show the bolded to be true. Do you have a link for this assertion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

She won the party nomination. The election is perfunctory at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

The "surveys" from the ANC and city show the numbers are relatively even between project opponents and proponents. Yes, there is a high level of opposition, but there is also a high level of support. There isn't one voice that "speaks for the community"

And, she ran on a platform of adding housing. Opposing this development would undermine credibility with her core supporters city-wide.

Which surveys? There were about a dozen of them because the results never supported the proponant's rhetoric.

People do not want to give up their small parking lot, garden and basketball/tennis court.

People do not want to downgrade their already small library.

People do not want to downgrade their already conparatively under resourced community center.

Inside a private apartment building does not equal public access.

An artificial turf lawn on top of a private apartment building does not equal green space let alone public green space.

[Anonymous]

Neither the community center nor the library are to be downgraded. Why do you continue with these gaslighting lies?

There will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be even funnier when the Chevy Chase NIMBYs discover that she is for the project.

We'll see. I think you're correct but I also wouldn't underestimate the level of opposition the community has for the project. Shutting it down would be an instant popularity boost for her.

The "surveys" from the ANC and city show the numbers are relatively even between project opponents and proponents. Yes, there is a high level of opposition, but there is also a high level of support. There isn't one voice that "speaks for the community"

And, she ran on a platform of adding housing. Opposing this development would undermine credibility with her core supporters city-wide.

Which surveys? There were about a dozen of them because the results never supported the proponant's rhetoric.

People do not want to give up their small parking lot, garden and basketball/tennis court. There will still be parking etc.

People do not want to downgrade their already small library. The library isn't being downgraded

People do not want to downgrade their already conparatively under resourced community center. The community center isn't being downgraded

Inside a private apartment building does not equal public access. there is public access to public spaces

An artificial turf lawn on top of a private apartment building does not equal green space let alone public green space. there is still green space

Not sure where you are getting your information, but maybe you should look at the DMPED and Rift Valley primary sources instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither the community center nor the library are to be downgraded. Why do you continue with these gaslighting lies?

There will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now.

I don't think you know what either the word gaslighting or lie means. But you are good at doing both of those things.

[Anonymous]

to the idiot above who said " there will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now."....um....there will be 177 apartments...more than there are now!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:to the idiot above who said " there will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now."....um....there will be 177 apartments...more than there are now!!!!!!!!!!

And?

Most of those people won't have cars. It is a boomer mindset that assume everyone has one or more cars....that isn't 21st century reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither the community center nor the library are to be downgraded. Why do you continue with these gaslighting lies?

There will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now.

I don't think you know what either the word gaslighting or lie means. But you are good at doing both of those things.

When there are thousands of wasted/unused square feet in each of the community center and library and the experts and planners at both DPR and DCPL are guiding their needs to the development, then bleating on about how both facilities are going to be smaller misses the point, but keep bleating!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to the idiot above who said " there will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now."....um....there will be 177 apartments...more than there are now!!!!!!!!!!

And?

Most of those people won't have cars. It is a boomer mindset that assume everyone has one or more cars....that isn't 21st century reality.

Hahahahaha just like 5333 Conn Ave ? IYKYK

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither the community center nor the library are to be downgraded. Why do you continue with these gaslighting lies?

There will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now.

I don't think you know what either the word gaslighting or lie means. But you are good at doing both of those things.

When there are thousands of wasted/unused square feet in each of the community center and library and the experts and planners at both DPR and DCPL are guiding their needs to the development, then bleating on about how both facilities are going to be smaller misses the point, but keep bleating!

You're intentionally misrepresenting the role of DPR and DCPL in this process

They are both literally never, under any circumstances, going to say that a political choice is bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither the community center nor the library are to be downgraded. Why do you continue with these gaslighting lies?

There will be over 100 parking spaces- more than there are now.

I don't think you know what either the word gaslighting or lie means. But you are good at doing both of those things.

When there are thousands of wasted/unused square feet in each of the community center and library and the experts and planners at both DPR and DCPL are guiding their needs to the development, then bleating on about how both facilities are going to be smaller misses the point, but keep bleating!

You're intentionally misrepresenting the role of DPR and DCPL in this process

They are both literally never, under any circumstances, going to say that a political choice is bad.

They have literally said on multiple occasions that they requested the allotted square footage prior to the RFP and that the designated space more than meets their program requirements. Anything else misrepresented by project opponents is a lie.