Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

Be honest - do you not think single family areas in the city should exist?

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

I find it's helpful to distinguish between "detached single-unit housing is allowed" and "ONLY detached single-unit housing is allowed, all other forms of housing are forbidden".

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

"Single family zoning" means "the only type of housing that is allowed here is single-unit housing; multi-unit housing is not allowed."

Getting rid of single family zoning means "single-unit and multi-unit housing are both allowed."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GGW is the enemy of the people.

Yeah, they're vermin and needing to be extinguished, right?

You disgust me. I'm on the same side of this as you are, and I despise being in bed with folks like you.

[Anonymous]

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..

No, it isn't. there are many more renters than was represented in the survey - do you not recognize renters who live on CT Ave as part of the community? And most of those renters are much, much younger than the 60+ respondents represent. Also, there are many more, new families in the area that are clearly under-represented.

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

Aren’t there a number of apartment buildings in Chevy Chase DC, particularly Connecticut Ave including from Nebraska north to Maryland? This notion of a “lock on single family development” is a complete red herring.

[Anonymous]

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.

Even by GGW standards that was one of the more ridiculous pieces they published.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

Aren’t there a number of apartment buildings in Chevy Chase DC, particularly Connecticut Ave including from Nebraska north to Maryland? This notion of a “lock on single family development” is a complete red herring.

There are more people who live in those buildings than in the single family homes. Yet, the SFH respondents dwarf the apartment renters in the survey results. Hence why the survey is totally meaningless.

[Anonymous]

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).

[Anonymous]

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..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

Aren’t there a number of apartment buildings in Chevy Chase DC, particularly Connecticut Ave including from Nebraska north to Maryland? This notion of a “lock on single family development” is a complete red herring.

There are more people who live in those buildings than in the single family homes. Yet, the SFH respondents dwarf the apartment renters in the survey results. Hence why the survey is totally meaningless.

First of all, who is to assume how people may respond to a survey based on their housing situation. Second, why wouldn’t folks on apartments respond?

[Anonymous]

Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.