New Ward 3 Homeless Families Shelter Site

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

Nice concern trolling. I'm sure your biggest concern about all of this is where MPD employees are going to park. Have you ever been in that station? At any given time, there are, at most ten staff at the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

It will have to be multiple levels. Currently the site doesn't have adequate parking for the police and they are about to lose about half their surface parking lot if the shelter is built.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

Nice concern trolling. I'm sure your biggest concern about all of this is where MPD employees are going to park. Have you ever been in that station? At any given time, there are, at most ten staff at the building.

There are many multiples more vehicles parked there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were surveyors out and about in the Second District's parking lot yesterday doing their thing. I don't know if the lawsuit has been dropped but it certainly looks like the shelter plan is moving forward.

The lawsuit has not been dropped.

It's hard to see how DC's plan (a six story building next to single family homes) gets built, though. Existing zoning would not permit a building of that size. Moreover, the DC comprehensive plan requires a buffer and height step down to areas of SFHs, which obviously is not part of DC's proposal at this site.

The shelter can be built as a matter-of-right, unlike many of the other proposed sites. Furthermore, the city already owns the land, removing another barrier.

Of all the sites selected, the MPD site makes the most logistical and financial sense.

To the north and west, there are no SFH. There is adequate buffer to the east and south to the small number of SFH that would be affected due to the large size of the parcel. Finding a piece of land in the city with those attributes is no small feat and Cheh and others are to be commended for making this happen.

Not correct. The height limitation at the site is 3 stories, so it is not matter of right. If you look at the plan, there is no step down buffer between the proposed building and the houses to the south.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone find it ironic that Bowser is making such a play for states rights, yet trampling on our rights? Chilling, isn't it? Makes me firmly opposed to D.C. Statehood right now.

building a homeless shelter does not violate your rights.

Choosing a site and moving ahead without public input, including through ANCs as required by law, does violate citizen rights.

Please be careful with your language. Zoning rules are not inalienable rights. It's not even clear that those zoning rules were broken - and if they were, "chilling" is not the right way to describe it. Aggravating is more like it. Overstating your case like this just weakens whatever case you have.

The lawsuit is not over zoning. It is over failure to follow the ANC provisions of the Home Rule Act. That is pretty fundamental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

Nice concern trolling. I'm sure your biggest concern about all of this is where MPD employees are going to park. Have you ever been in that station? At any given time, there are, at most ten staff at the building.

I don't know about you...but if you take into account all the officers out on patrol, I'm pretty confident there are a lot more than 10 staff at that station on any given day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone find it ironic that Bowser is making such a play for states rights, yet trampling on our rights? Chilling, isn't it? Makes me firmly opposed to D.C. Statehood right now.

building a homeless shelter does not violate your rights.

Choosing a site and moving ahead without public input, including through ANCs as required by law, does violate citizen rights.

Please be careful with your language. Zoning rules are not inalienable rights. It's not even clear that those zoning rules were broken - and if they were, "chilling" is not the right way to describe it. Aggravating is more like it. Overstating your case like this just weakens whatever case you have.

The lawsuit is not over zoning. It is over failure to follow the ANC provisions of the Home Rule Act. That is pretty fundamental.

As an ANC Commissioner I can tell you that those provisions are unenforceable. The A stands for "Advisory" and the Council is free to ignore their advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

It will have to be multiple levels. Currently the site doesn't have adequate parking for the police and they are about to lose about half their surface parking lot if the shelter is built.

Lol the MPD has enough trouble retaining their younger officers, I'm sure stunts like this shelter plan are not helping matters as the council has shown they will gladly take a dump on the Police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone find it ironic that Bowser is making such a play for states rights, yet trampling on our rights? Chilling, isn't it? Makes me firmly opposed to D.C. Statehood right now.

building a homeless shelter does not violate your rights.

Choosing a site and moving ahead without public input, including through ANCs as required by law, does violate citizen rights.

Please be careful with your language. Zoning rules are not inalienable rights. It's not even clear that those zoning rules were broken - and if they were, "chilling" is not the right way to describe it. Aggravating is more like it. Overstating your case like this just weakens whatever case you have.

The lawsuit is not over zoning. It is over failure to follow the ANC provisions of the Home Rule Act. That is pretty fundamental.

As an ANC Commissioner I can tell you that those provisions are unenforceable. The A stands for "Advisory" and the Council is free to ignore their advice.

The DC agencies have to accord the ANC 'great weight.' Here, they were bypassed. The DC Court of Appeals will likely decide. Many feel that the plan will fall apart at the zoning commission, and will be dead and buried in the next mayoral election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone find it ironic that Bowser is making such a play for states rights, yet trampling on our rights? Chilling, isn't it? Makes me firmly opposed to D.C. Statehood right now.

building a homeless shelter does not violate your rights.

Choosing a site and moving ahead without public input, including through ANCs as required by law, does violate citizen rights.

Please be careful with your language. Zoning rules are not inalienable rights. It's not even clear that those zoning rules were broken - and if they were, "chilling" is not the right way to describe it. Aggravating is more like it. Overstating your case like this just weakens whatever case you have.

The lawsuit is not over zoning. It is over failure to follow the ANC provisions of the Home Rule Act. That is pretty fundamental.

As an ANC Commissioner I can tell you that those provisions are unenforceable. The A stands for "Advisory" and the Council is free to ignore their advice.

I agree, the "great weight" provision makes no logical sense. If someone has the authority ti make a decision, they have it. What does it then mean if they have to give great weight to someone else's input? It's still their decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

Nice concern trolling. I'm sure your biggest concern about all of this is where MPD employees are going to park. Have you ever been in that station? At any given time, there are, at most ten staff at the building.

Have you ever been there? Just for the sake of refuting this, I walked by at 3 different times today. The back parking lot was packed, on A Sunday, with at most, 2-3 spots available on one of the times I've walked by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really do have to wonder where all those MPD employees are going to park...not exactly an abundance of parking in that area.

I read somewhere they intend to put in a decked parking structure.

Are they going to build the parking structure first? All those cars have to go somewhere while the shelter is being constructed.

Nice concern trolling. I'm sure your biggest concern about all of this is where MPD employees are going to park. Have you ever been in that station? At any given time, there are, at most ten staff at the building.

Have you ever been there? Just for the sake of refuting this, I walked by at 3 different times today. The back parking lot was packed, on A Sunday, with at most, 2-3 spots available on one of the times I've walked by.

Nothing to see here. Council member Cheh has it all figured out. She's a highly intelligent law professor.

[Anonymous]

Her Council career has jumped the shark. Can anyone suggest a viable alternative who will represent Ward 3 residents and businesses in a reasonable way? I'd like to start supporting that person. Where's the opposition in Chehdom?