For the anti-development groups in Ward 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares!

It's not thru-traffic, it's the tens of hundreds of cars circling the residential blocks, looking for free on-street parking. Then they get understandably pissed and create a "spot" hanging over 50% of your driveway. Think Adams Morgan. No thanks.

We solved that in Clarendon by having County change zone parking restrictions. Non-residents can only park btwn 1am-8am 24/7. No parking for bars/restaurants, traders or whole foods anymore. It went from an Adams Morgan atmosphere back to residential overnight.

Of course-DC would never do that. Business hasn't suffered over here and there's a ton to walk too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares!

It's not thru-traffic, it's the tens of hundreds of cars circling the residential blocks, looking for free on-street parking. Then they get understandably pissed and create a "spot" hanging over 50% of your driveway. Think Adams Morgan. No thanks.

The driveway blocking "complaint" is such a red herring. Call the cops, get them ticketed and towed. I seriously doubt your driveway (if you have one)is inaccessible every weekend. More likely, your beef is that the people looking for free on-street parking are making it more difficult for YOU to find free on-street parking. To which I say, tough. It's a public street, you have no inherent right to free parking.

It's not a red herring. Getting someone ticketed and towed for blocking a driveway in DC is usually a one or two day affair. Unless some drunken yuppie has forgotten his car all weekend, it's not worth the hassle. You just have to wait out the bar/restaurant patron for a few hours and miss whatever you needed to leave your driveway for. Of course, the parking miscreant may come back many hours later, and it's no fun being awakened at 3 in the morning, after the bars close, by some drunken lout shouting to his friends and relieving himself in your front yard. Perhaps if one moves by M Street in Georgetown or 18th Street in Adams-Morgan, one might say that the homeowner knew of the nuisance. But I could understand the reluctance of someone who lives a couple blocks away from the neighborhood-serving retail strip in Chevy Chase DC, for example. not wanting to see the whole area redeveloped as some "Clarendon Generica Commons" restaruant, bar and destination retail center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares!

It's not thru-traffic, it's the tens of hundreds of cars circling the residential blocks, looking for free on-street parking. Then they get understandably pissed and create a "spot" hanging over 50% of your driveway. Think Adams Morgan. No thanks.

We solved that in Clarendon by having County change zone parking restrictions. Non-residents can only park btwn 1am-8am 24/7. No parking for bars/restaurants, traders or whole foods anymore. It went from an Adams Morgan atmosphere back to residential overnight.

Of course-DC would never do that. Business hasn't suffered over here and there's a ton to walk too.

They do this in Edgemoor/Bethesda also -- some streets are residential permit (narrow area), 24/7. But I can just here the whining if DC were institute such parking restrictions on the side streets in Cleveland Park or Tenleytown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares!

It's not thru-traffic, it's the tens of hundreds of cars circling the residential blocks, looking for free on-street parking. Then they get understandably pissed and create a "spot" hanging over 50% of your driveway. Think Adams Morgan. No thanks.

We solved that in Clarendon by having County change zone parking restrictions. Non-residents can only park btwn 1am-8am 24/7. No parking for bars/restaurants, traders or whole foods anymore. It went from an Adams Morgan atmosphere back to residential overnight.

Of course-DC would never do that. Business hasn't suffered over here and there's a ton to walk too.

They do this in Edgemoor/Bethesda also -- some streets are residential permit (narrow area), 24/7. But I can just here the whining if DC were institute such parking restrictions on the side streets in Cleveland Park or Tenleytown.

Yep. I am a former DC resident and they do seem to cater to those that live outside of the District more than their own residents at times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So instead of having a higher tax base, wealthier residents moving in and better options you'll take Babes, a Giant stuck in the 1920s and still have the traffic except they're from Maryland not DC. It's not like they plan to develop Newark or Macomb. It's the main thoroughfares!

It's not thru-traffic, it's the tens of hundreds of cars circling the residential blocks, looking for free on-street parking. Then they get understandably pissed and create a "spot" hanging over 50% of your driveway. Think Adams Morgan. No thanks.

We solved that in Clarendon by having County change zone parking restrictions. Non-residents can only park btwn 1am-8am 24/7. No parking for bars/restaurants, traders or whole foods anymore. It went from an Adams Morgan atmosphere back to residential overnight.

Of course-DC would never do that. Business hasn't suffered over here and there's a ton to walk too.

They do this in Edgemoor/Bethesda also -- some streets are residential permit (narrow area), 24/7. But I can just here the whining if DC were institute such parking restrictions on the side streets in Cleveland Park or Tenleytown.

Yep. I am a former DC resident and they do seem to cater to those that live outside of the District more than their own residents at times.

This is mostly because there are extremely powerful ex-resident interests that drive policy: think Ward 9, the churches, and the fact that most DC government workers are non-residents. Fortunately, as DC's population grows richer and more diverse, this kind of stuff is slowly coming to an end. The days of city policy being crafted to satisfy taxi drivers, and the residents of PG County are slowly waning.

[Anonymous]

The opposition is kind of weird - it seems to be focused on parking fears and elitist horror at the prospective retail outlets. So it's irrelevant to the opponents that other areas, such as Bethesda or Ballston, have figured out ways to prevent resident parking from being usurped - since those very successful areas evoke the real underlying reason why they don't want development: they are snobs.

[Anonymous]

Actually they DO have an inherent right. They pay property taxes. I'm all for development but I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I pay property taxes in DC too, but not in that area. I imagine the NIMBYs have as many roblems with me parking to go out to dinner as their counterparts in MD.

I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I couldn't agree more. Except here, the "suburbanites" in question are the people who live in CCDC, Cleveland Park, etc. They want a suburban existence without the inconvenience of living in a suburb. There are good and bad things to living in the city - parking is one of the drawbacks. It's ridiculous to limit rational infill and growth patterns because you want to live in Mayberry.

(I'd have a little more sympathy if I thought any of these whiners had trouble parking their one car. But I'll bet that many/most of them have 2+, just want to use the street for free parking, and don't want to be inconvenienced. Don't even get me started on the "they block my driveway" crowd - they HAVE parking, but don't want additional development because of a few lawbreakers. But really, how ridiculous is, "People sometimes block my driveway, so we should stop potentially millions of dollars in development." Ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Actually they DO have an inherent right. They pay property taxes. I'm all for development but I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I pay property taxes in DC too, but not in that area. I imagine the NIMBYs have as many roblems with me parking to go out to dinner as their counterparts in MD.

I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I couldn't agree more. Except here, the "suburbanites" in question are the people who live in CCDC, Cleveland Park, etc. They want a suburban existence without the inconvenience of living in a suburb. There are good and bad things to living in the city - parking is one of the drawbacks. It's ridiculous to limit rational infill and growth patterns because you want to live in Mayberry.

(I'd have a little more sympathy if I thought any of these whiners had trouble parking their one car. But I'll bet that many/most of them have 2+, just want to use the street for free parking, and don't want to be inconvenienced. Don't even get me started on the "they block my driveway" crowd - they HAVE parking, but don't want additional development because of a few lawbreakers. But really, how ridiculous is, "People sometimes block my driveway, so we should stop potentially millions of dollars in development." Ridiculous.

If it makes you feel better, this suburbanite pays property tax on a home in the District.

[Anonymous]

In fact, DC's DDOT is considering measures very similar to what Bethesda has done to protect residential neighborhoods near commercial areas, in response to planned development along Wisconsin Ave. and south of Fannie Mae. These include: resident only parking on streets within 2 to 3 blocks of Wisconsin, including in the evening; no left turn signs from Wisconsin at all but the major side streets; more 'do not enter' restrictions and some forced turn barriers; and consideration of 'one way' restrictions to create a "maze effect" in residential areas near Wisconsin to discourage through traffic. This is exactly the kind of creative thinking DC needs to allow for some balanced infill development while protecting the safety and livability of adjacent residential aras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually they DO have an inherent right. They pay property taxes. I'm all for development but I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I pay property taxes in DC too, but not in that area. I imagine the NIMBYs have as many roblems with me parking to go out to dinner as their counterparts in MD.

I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I couldn't agree more. Except here, the "suburbanites" in question are the people who live in CCDC, Cleveland Park, etc. They want a suburban existence without the inconvenience of living in a suburb. There are good and bad things to living in the city - parking is one of the drawbacks. It's ridiculous to limit rational infill and growth patterns because you want to live in Mayberry.

(I'd have a little more sympathy if I thought any of these whiners had trouble parking their one car. But I'll bet that many/most of them have 2+, just want to use the street for free parking, and don't want to be inconvenienced. Don't even get me started on the "they block my driveway" crowd - they HAVE parking, but don't want additional development because of a few lawbreakers. But really, how ridiculous is, "People sometimes block my driveway, so we should stop potentially millions of dollars in development." Ridiculous.

If it makes you feel better, this suburbanite pays property tax on a home in the District.

Not really. Do you pay income taxes? Or vote in DC? No? Okay, we don't care what you have to say then.

[Anonymous]

I couldn't agree more. Except here, the "suburbanites" in question are the people who live in CCDC, Cleveland Park, etc. They want a suburban existence without the inconvenience of living in a suburb. There are good and bad things to living in the city - parking is one of the drawbacks. It's ridiculous to limit rational infill and growth patterns because you want to live in Mayberry.

(I'd have a little more sympathy if I thought any of these whiners had trouble parking their one car. But I'll bet that many/most of them have 2+, just want to use the street for free parking, and don't want to be inconvenienced. Don't even get me started on the "they block my driveway" crowd - they HAVE parking, but don't want additional development because of a few lawbreakers. But really, how ridiculous is, "People sometimes block my driveway, so we should stop potentially millions of dollars in development." Ridiculous.

I don't need your sympathy, but thanks. My neighbors and I are organized, connected, kinda old, and collectively pretty wealthy. We like Mayberry. We'll manage (as we always have) to thwart the Clarendo-Bethes-Ilver Spring Faux Towne Centre Ye Olde Commons high-rise development that you so desperately want.

Enjoy your rental unit and your Zip Car! And enjoy your 20s, too. Me, I'm enjoying my driveway.

[Anonymous]

At least they are probably living somewhere where they actually have representation!!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually they DO have an inherent right. They pay property taxes. I'm all for development but I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I pay property taxes in DC too, but not in that area. I imagine the NIMBYs have as many roblems with me parking to go out to dinner as their counterparts in MD.

I'm against suburbanites thinking they "own" residential DC areas.

I couldn't agree more. Except here, the "suburbanites" in question are the people who live in CCDC, Cleveland Park, etc. They want a suburban existence without the inconvenience of living in a suburb. There are good and bad things to living in the city - parking is one of the drawbacks. It's ridiculous to limit rational infill and growth patterns because you want to live in Mayberry.

(I'd have a little more sympathy if I thought any of these whiners had trouble parking their one car. But I'll bet that many/most of them have 2+, just want to use the street for free parking, and don't want to be inconvenienced. Don't even get me started on the "they block my driveway" crowd - they HAVE parking, but don't want additional development because of a few lawbreakers. But really, how ridiculous is, "People sometimes block my driveway, so we should stop potentially millions of dollars in development." Ridiculous.

If it makes you feel better, this suburbanite pays property tax on a home in the District.

Not really. Do you pay income taxes? Or vote in DC? No? Okay, we don't care what you have to say then.

[Anonymous]

I don't need your sympathy, but thanks. My neighbors and I are organized, connected, kinda old, and collectively pretty wealthy. We like Mayberry. We'll manage (as we always have) to thwart the Clarendo-Bethes-Ilver Spring Faux Towne Centre Ye Olde Commons high-rise development that you so desperately want.

Enjoy your rental unit and your Zip Car! And enjoy your 20s, too. Me, I'm enjoying my driveway.

Based on that attitude, you do need the sympathy. Yeesh.