Oh, Chevy Chase (DC affordable housing)!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean nobody likes affordable housing. If you don’t oppose it you are idealistic or it doesn’t affect you or both

To add, I live in a subsidized apt building. Was lucky to get into a relatively decent one but many neighbors are quite the characters. Higher level of littering for sure compared to my old complex. Pot smell is on par. Noise level on par or higher

I don't think that can be generalized. The affordable housing in Potomac is filled with families who just want good schools for the kids.

The it’s not a housing authority subsidized building, it’s probably just old cheap apartments.
It absolutely can be generalized. Some are better than others but sometimes it’s easier and more effective to put the foot down right at the beginning.
Nip it in the bud so to speak.
But I am sure grateful to the progressive people in my neighborhood - I can show my gratitude by not littering and not being weird but most don’t bother

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Nah. Vacancies come up all the time. As seen in the many people the city has already placed in subsidized apartments along the CT corridor.
No shiny objects for developers, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I think they do understand. These are little foot soldiers being sent to our homes and social media sites to spread lies and deception. The Washington Post article was clearly part of their planning and propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I think they do understand. These are little foot soldiers being sent to our homes and social media sites to spread lies and deception. The Washington Post article was clearly part of their planning and propaganda.

Your tinfoil hat is a little loose around the edges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I think they do understand. These are little foot soldiers being sent to our homes and social media sites to spread lies and deception. The Washington Post article was clearly part of their planning and propaganda.

Your tinfoil hat is a little loose around the edges.

Nope, and please stop litttering my mailbox with your "flyers".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I think they do understand. These are little foot soldiers being sent to our homes and social media sites to spread lies and deception. The Washington Post article was clearly part of their planning and propaganda.

Your tinfoil hat is a little loose around the edges.

Nope, and please stop litttering my mailbox with your "flyers".

Sure, as soon as you stop taking checks from your developer bosses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Nah. Vacancies come up all the time. As seen in the many people the city has already placed in subsidized apartments along the CT corridor.
No shiny objects for developers, though.

This is typical deflection and it makes you sound really ignorant. But I guess that’s better than coming out loudly racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I think they do understand. These are little foot soldiers being sent to our homes and social media sites to spread lies and deception. The Washington Post article was clearly part of their planning and propaganda.

Your tinfoil hat is a little loose around the edges.

Nope, and please stop litttering my mailbox with your "flyers".

Sure, as soon as you stop taking checks from your developer bosses.

There you go, you just revealed yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

I don’t think this is true.

The city has been placing homeless people in subsidized apartments up and down CT Ave for years now. No reason they couldn’t do the same for working class families in the apartment bldgs in CC. But again, no gain for developers in that scenario.

We have an acute housing crisis, there are not enough vacant apartments. You sound very out of touch.

One seven-story building in CC won’t change that.

Each additional unit will help. Obviously.

Great. Start with the apartment buildings that already exist. There are a lot of them.

They are already in use. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

DP: This vacant building map suggests otherwise: https://dataviz1.dc.gov/t/OCTO/views/DOBPublicDashboard/VacantProperties?%3AshowAppBanner=false&%3Adisplay_count=n&%3AshowVizHome=n&%3Aorigin=viz_share_link&%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no

[Anonymous]

I live a few blocks from the proposed site and read the listserve regularly. Granted the listserve may not be a fully accurate representation of how neighbors feel, but the article’s claim that “Most residents agree the site needs to be updated, but the addition of affordable housing has proved divisive” Is absolutely misleading in the most unfair, nasty and self-serving way. That is not at all the way people in the neighborhood feel. What we are sensing is that the city is hiding behind a purported objective of increasing the number of affordable housing to give giveaways to developers, and, in the process, sacrificing the existing positive attributes of the site (mainly open space). The key here is how many affordable units will the neighborhood actually get in exchange for a massive building on the community center site. My understanding is that in practice we will only get a handful. So why don’t we just build those few affordable units and not build the remaining luxury units that the developers salivate over (or build fewer of them) and keep the open space instead? That’s the approach that would satisfy me at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live a few blocks from the proposed site and read the listserve regularly. Granted the listserve may not be a fully accurate representation of how neighbors feel, but the article’s claim that “Most residents agree the site needs to be updated, but the addition of affordable housing has proved divisive” Is absolutely misleading in the most unfair, nasty and self-serving way. That is not at all the way people in the neighborhood feel. What we are sensing is that the city is hiding behind a purported objective of increasing the number of affordable housing to give giveaways to developers, and, in the process, sacrificing the existing positive attributes of the site (mainly open space). The key here is how many affordable units will the neighborhood actually get in exchange for a massive building on the community center site. My understanding is that in practice we will only get a handful. So why don’t we just build those few affordable units and not build the remaining luxury units that the developers salivate over (or build fewer of them) and keep the open space instead? That’s the approach that would satisfy me at least.

Because selling the luxury units is what pays for the construction of the affordable units. That’s the model. And it creates a mixed income building, which people think improves the likelihood that it will maintain itself. What you’re describing is a housing project.

[Anonymous]

I guess when you don’t have anything of substance to offer, just accuse everyone that disagrees with you of being racist.

I guess that it’s an argument.

Not a good one, but an argument.

Classist? Maybe you’d be on to something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live a few blocks from the proposed site and read the listserve regularly. Granted the listserve may not be a fully accurate representation of how neighbors feel, but the article’s claim that “Most residents agree the site needs to be updated, but the addition of affordable housing has proved divisive” Is absolutely misleading in the most unfair, nasty and self-serving way. That is not at all the way people in the neighborhood feel. What we are sensing is that the city is hiding behind a purported objective of increasing the number of affordable housing to give giveaways to developers, and, in the process, sacrificing the existing positive attributes of the site (mainly open space). The key here is how many affordable units will the neighborhood actually get in exchange for a massive building on the community center site. My understanding is that in practice we will only get a handful. So why don’t we just build those few affordable units and not build the remaining luxury units that the developers salivate over (or build fewer of them) and keep the open space instead? That’s the approach that would satisfy me at least.

One could also point out that you already live near a massive and lovely preserved green space that exists because of what little protection the Black family who were forced off that land had. If the developers had not had to use imminent domain to seize that land and force out the Black owners, it would be full of fancy SFHs like the rest of the neighborhood. So you know, maybe pay it forward on the “open space” thing.

Anyone who visits the site and beholds the “open space” to which you all are so devoted would seriously question your sincerity. You’re all John Muirs indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess when you don’t have anything of substance to offer, just accuse everyone that disagrees with you of being racist.

I guess that it’s an argument.

Not a good one, but an argument.

Classist? Maybe you’d be on to something.

This isn’t even happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are already many apartment buildings in CC that are affordable. But obviously that does nothing for the developers.

As someone who would love to live closer to work, can you link to some of these affordable apartment buildings in CC DC?