Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Is GGW advocating for keeping Chevy Chase the way the segregationists wanted it in 1900? No. Are you? Well, no, you also aren't, because otherwise you'd be advocating for the return of the streetcar and the abolition of street parking. Chevy Chase DC was planned as a neighborhood without cars, after all.

What about horses? Did they design it for abundant horse parking?

1. Horses aren't cars.
2. Cars aren't horses.
3. No.

According to you, the Chevy Chase Development Co did not take into account the dominant form of transportation at the time when developing housing? LOL.

Streetcars and feet.

Isn’t your objection to low density areas like Chevy Chase that they are not designed to facilitate more walking? Yet here you are trying to tell people that back in 1900, rich people were going to move to this low density, isolated and exclusive suburb and walk? Where the hell were they supposed to walk to? There was barely a couple stores back then.

There's plenty of information about streetcar suburbs, if you're interested in learning some history.

[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:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

Next thing, they'll say how hilly it is here, yet Seattle and SF - which are undeniably more severely hilly - also have well-used cycling networks. DC is freaking great for cycling (coming from someone who has cycled in most American cities). I mean, its not as flat as Chicago, but jeez, its pretty darn close, especially if you're in the downtown or just outlying areas, then its easy, easy.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

In this context it is focusing regional development around metro stations and improving "last mile" solutions like bike share, bike lanes and car share so as to save the agriculture areas in the exurbs because plowing under those fields for single family subdivisions is horrible land use policy.

Some of that makes sense apart from bike lanes. Just not practical for families and in the type of extreme weather conditions that DC has.

DC doesn't have extreme weather conditions. It doesn't have the cold of Minneapolis or the heat of Phoenix. Not even close. Yes, it does have seasons, but it basically is about the same, perhaps better, than New York City, and New York has hundreds of miles of well used bike lanes. Try again for some other excuse, because this one doesn't fly.

[Anonymous]

Um.. city has a housing problem. Let's update some government owned buildings to still serve the same function they currently provide today, but also add some housing on top.

Cool.

Seems like a useful idea to me.

Why is this bad?

Crazy people.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Is GGW advocating for keeping Chevy Chase the way the segregationists wanted it in 1900? No. Are you? Well, no, you also aren't, because otherwise you'd be advocating for the return of the streetcar and the abolition of street parking. Chevy Chase DC was planned as a neighborhood without cars, after all.

What about horses? Did they design it for abundant horse parking?

1. Horses aren't cars.
2. Cars aren't horses.
3. No.

According to you, the Chevy Chase Development Co did not take into account the dominant form of transportation at the time when developing housing? LOL.

Streetcars and feet.

Isn’t your objection to low density areas like Chevy Chase that they are not designed to facilitate more walking? Yet here you are trying to tell people that back in 1900, rich people were going to move to this low density, isolated and exclusive suburb and walk? Where the hell were they supposed to walk to? There was barely a couple stores back then.

There's plenty of information about streetcar suburbs, if you're interested in learning some history.

So you’re telling me that the rich people who lived in these exclusive, low density street car suburbs had no other access to transportation than their own two feet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in Upper CC on the DC side in the 70’s and 80’s. Homes were not being built back then. They had been there for a very long time. Back then houses were for sale and were not bought for quite some time. Not because they were expensive. Back then, nobody wanted to live there. They wanted Bethesda or the MD side of CC. It was around 1991 I remember a real small house off Military and 32nd going for over a million. From there, it just got stupid on hosing prices. A lot of those homes are from the 40’s and 50’s

You are basically lying out of your a**. There were almost zero houses going for over $1MM in 1991…none. There is a small house being offered as we speak for $900k. The median price in 1991 was likely around $250k…and that is generous.

I live in Bethesda and my house was sold in ‘86 for $380k. My neighborhood would never be considered close to as prestigious as CCDC. So you’re wrong too.

What are you talking about…there has always been a premium for crossing the border into MD from DC, such that identical houses straddling Western Avenue were worth several hundred thousand $$$s more on the MD side.

My neighbor selling their 3000 sw ft house in CCDC for around $1.5MM paid $260k for the house in 1996.

Have you checked the resale value of your $380k Bethesda home?

You think there’s a MD premium on home values? Sorry, I’m not going to listen to you anymore.

Not as much as 20-30 years ago, but very similar houses still sell for more on the MD side.

No they don’t. Not even close.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Is GGW advocating for keeping Chevy Chase the way the segregationists wanted it in 1900? No. Are you? Well, no, you also aren't, because otherwise you'd be advocating for the return of the streetcar and the abolition of street parking. Chevy Chase DC was planned as a neighborhood without cars, after all.

What about horses? Did they design it for abundant horse parking?

1. Horses aren't cars.
2. Cars aren't horses.
3. No.

According to you, the Chevy Chase Development Co did not take into account the dominant form of transportation at the time when developing housing? LOL.

Streetcars and feet.

Isn’t your objection to low density areas like Chevy Chase that they are not designed to facilitate more walking? Yet here you are trying to tell people that back in 1900, rich people were going to move to this low density, isolated and exclusive suburb and walk? Where the hell were they supposed to walk to? There was barely a couple stores back then.

There's plenty of information about streetcar suburbs, if you're interested in learning some history.

So you’re telling me that the rich people who lived in these exclusive, low density street car suburbs had no other access to transportation than their own two feet?

Please read up on streetcar suburbs. Especially if you think that people then used horses like people now use cars. There is a ton of information you can use to educate yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um.. city has a housing problem. Let's update some government owned buildings to still serve the same function they currently provide today, but also add some housing on top.

Cool.

Seems like a useful idea to me.

Why is this bad?

Crazy people.

DC, including Ward 3, has no shortage of market rate apartments and condos. An additional 1300 have recently come on line right around Wegmans, with more in the pipeline across the Ward. It’s therefore suspect when DC wants to make public assets available on favorable terms to favored, politically connected developers.

[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:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Good point.

It’s odd that GGWash puts onus of past racism on current residents who had nothing to do with it than the company who created it, profited from it and financially supports them.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Is GGW advocating for keeping Chevy Chase the way the segregationists wanted it in 1900? No. Are you? Well, no, you also aren't, because otherwise you'd be advocating for the return of the streetcar and the abolition of street parking. Chevy Chase DC was planned as a neighborhood without cars, after all.

Did they really ban street parking in 1900? Seems like a weird thing they would do back then when so few people owned cars.

The concept then was to have streeteries in place of car storage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um.. city has a housing problem. Let's update some government owned buildings to still serve the same function they currently provide today, but also add some housing on top.

Cool.

Seems like a useful idea to me.

Why is this bad?

Crazy people.

DC, including Ward 3, has no shortage of market rate apartments and condos. An additional 1300 have recently come on line right around Wegmans, with more in the pipeline across the Ward. It’s therefore suspect when DC wants to make public assets available on favorable terms to favored, politically connected developers.

How did you come to the conclusion that there is "no shortage"? "There are market-rate apartments and condos" does not mean "There is no shortage of market-rate apartments and condos."

[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:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

LOL, that is quite a reach. So you think the owners of the Chevy Chase Land Company haven't evolved over a century?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um.. city has a housing problem. Let's update some government owned buildings to still serve the same function they currently provide today, but also add some housing on top.

Cool.

Seems like a useful idea to me.

Why is this bad?

Crazy people.

DC, including Ward 3, has no shortage of market rate apartments and condos. An additional 1300 have recently come on line right around Wegmans, with more in the pipeline across the Ward. It’s therefore suspect when DC wants to make public assets available on favorable terms to favored, politically connected developers.

Just wait until the Friendship Heights development is completed.

It’s even weirder to consider that this is a priority for neighborhoods that are not well connected by transit.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Is GGW advocating for keeping Chevy Chase the way the segregationists wanted it in 1900? No. Are you? Well, no, you also aren't, because otherwise you'd be advocating for the return of the streetcar and the abolition of street parking. Chevy Chase DC was planned as a neighborhood without cars, after all.

What about horses? Did they design it for abundant horse parking?

1. Horses aren't cars.
2. Cars aren't horses.
3. No.

According to you, the Chevy Chase Development Co did not take into account the dominant form of transportation at the time when developing housing? LOL.

Streetcars and feet.

Isn’t your objection to low density areas like Chevy Chase that they are not designed to facilitate more walking? Yet here you are trying to tell people that back in 1900, rich people were going to move to this low density, isolated and exclusive suburb and walk? Where the hell were they supposed to walk to? There was barely a couple stores back then.

There's plenty of information about streetcar suburbs, if you're interested in learning some history.

So you’re telling me that the rich people who lived in these exclusive, low density street car suburbs had no other access to transportation than their own two feet?

How many people own cars in 1903?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I don't think any of this shit matters. Mary Rowse unilaterally filed her 20 year old Historic District designation request this week. Now everyone in this area will be doomed to kneeling at her altar and begging to be able to do light gray paint rather than white.

Historic preservation doesn't cover paint color.

Wood siding with stucco then. Jesus. Same thing. Mary and crew gonna give everyone a hard time just because they can and they enjoy exercising power over others.

They tried to create a historic district 15 years ago and the community voted it down by a 4-to-1 margin.

Frumin is against and let’s hope the process at least is the same as last time as I think the community will again vote it down by a similarly wide margin.

Didn’t realize Chairman Frumin had power over historic designations.

He doesn’t, but assuming all the ANCs are against, the affected population is against and the Ward 3 rep is against…makes it hard to approve.

The ANCs have no role in the historic designation process.

Most of the Connecticut Corridor ANCs now are pro-smart growth and against preservation.

What, exactly, is smart growth? And why do they think it is needed?

And why exactly is “Smart Growth” needed in Chevy Chase DC which was planned as a low-scale leafy semi suburban neighborhood. There have been and are plenty of locations in DC where dense, tall and mixed -use development is welcomed, like the Wharf, Nancy Yard, etc. DC has a diversity of neighborhoods with different attributes that make many singular if not unique. Is it necessary that they all look the same?

Around 1900, with a streetcar, by a segregationist. Now it's 120 years later, and things do sometimes change.

You mean the segregationist senator who was a founder of the Chevy Chase Land Company 125 years ago? Chevy Chase Land Co today funds Greater Greater Washington. So a long ago association with a segregationist investor justifies upzoning a somehow “tainted” green, lower density neighborhood to dense upmarket development ? Yet it’s perfectly fine for GGW to take money from the same company that the segregationist founded?

Good point.

It’s odd that GGWash puts onus of past racism on current residents who had nothing to do with it than the company who created it, profited from it and financially supports them.

Fact is, the land use policies haven't changed much, which is exclusionary and part of the problem. Change the land use policies to be more inclusive and the issue for current residents goes away. As long as the current resident oppose those changes, they remain part of the problem. The comments returned in the ANC survey prove the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um.. city has a housing problem. Let's update some government owned buildings to still serve the same function they currently provide today, but also add some housing on top.

Cool.

Seems like a useful idea to me.

Why is this bad?

Crazy people.

DC, including Ward 3, has no shortage of market rate apartments and condos. An additional 1300 have recently come on line right around Wegmans, with more in the pipeline across the Ward. It’s therefore suspect when DC wants to make public assets available on favorable terms to favored, politically connected developers.

Just wait until the Friendship Heights development is completed.

It’s even weirder to consider that this is a priority for neighborhoods that are not well connected by transit.

Time to restore the streetcar suburbs' streetcars.