Wisconsin Ave Development Project

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one instance where I am glad the city will railroad this through.

Sorry everyone that thinks screaming into DCUM will change anything.

Ha. There is probably no higher concentration of litigators on the planet than there is in Ward 3 along Wisconsin and Connecticut Aves. You must be new to DC, or unfamiliar with our track record in lawsuits

Who is suing to stop development on Wisconsin Avenue? Nobody.

Considering there are plenty of complainers that won’t actually ever put their money where their mouth is…and law firms want money like anyone else…who is funding this?

Again…development on a major thoroughfare where there is already lots of development…someone will sue to stop that?

Why would anyone throw their money down the toilet on that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that NWDC neighborhoods are so appealing that we should densify them so more people can live there. What the proponents get wrong is what makes the neighborhoods appealing -- safe residential areas with green space and good schools. Of course, you can add some density to those areas, but there is a tipping point where the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable. I love the fact that there is a mix of condos, townhomes, and single family homes in my neighborhood, but it's a balance and if it were to tip over into primarily big buildings with condos, it would lose what makes it special. It is nice to have neighborhoods like Navy Yard for people who choose that lifestyle, but it's also ok for other neighborhoods to have a predominance of single family homes. Our city can have different types of neighborhoods.

What you mean by "the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable" is "it's not what I would want." However, you are not everyone, and land use should not be based on your - or my, or anyone's - personal preferences.

Sorry. Agree 100% with previous post. DC should avoid changing radically the character of NWDC. Those residents pay the bills in DC and are entirely why DC has done economically well until recently. Moreover, there are plenty of places in DC where larger condo or apartment buildings can be built. There simply is no need to push the balance to a tipping point.

How would adding housing on commercial corridors radically change the character of NWDC? No one is talking about putting massive apartment buildings in the side streets.

How would adding thousands of new people (units) to a 2-mile stretch change the character of the neighborhoods immediately adjacent to that corridor? Are you seriously asking this question?

Yes, I am. Do the apartment buildings on Connecticut near Woodley Park and Cleveland Park make the SFH blocks there worse somehow?

[Anonymous]

It’s stupid. Ain’t happening. The city is bankrupt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that NWDC neighborhoods are so appealing that we should densify them so more people can live there. What the proponents get wrong is what makes the neighborhoods appealing -- safe residential areas with green space and good schools. Of course, you can add some density to those areas, but there is a tipping point where the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable. I love the fact that there is a mix of condos, townhomes, and single family homes in my neighborhood, but it's a balance and if it were to tip over into primarily big buildings with condos, it would lose what makes it special. It is nice to have neighborhoods like Navy Yard for people who choose that lifestyle, but it's also ok for other neighborhoods to have a predominance of single family homes. Our city can have different types of neighborhoods.

What you mean by "the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable" is "it's not what I would want." However, you are not everyone, and land use should not be based on your - or my, or anyone's - personal preferences.

Sorry. Agree 100% with previous post. DC should avoid changing radically the character of NWDC. Those residents pay the bills in DC and are entirely why DC has done economically well until recently. Moreover, there are plenty of places in DC where larger condo or apartment buildings can be built. There simply is no need to push the balance to a tipping point.

How would adding housing on commercial corridors radically change the character of NWDC? No one is talking about putting massive apartment buildings in the side streets.

How would adding thousands of new people (units) to a 2-mile stretch change the character of the neighborhoods immediately adjacent to that corridor? Are you seriously asking this question?

Yes, I am. Do the apartment buildings on Connecticut near Woodley Park and Cleveland Park make the SFH blocks there worse somehow?

Well, when they are stuffed full of unscreened voucher recipients they do .

People have already answered your question - schools, traffic, light, nuisance tenants if Frumin is involved, aesthetics (depending on what's put up - it's not always the best architecture), parking, misplaced focus on more residences not commerce and dining which is far more needed, etc etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that NWDC neighborhoods are so appealing that we should densify them so more people can live there. What the proponents get wrong is what makes the neighborhoods appealing -- safe residential areas with green space and good schools. Of course, you can add some density to those areas, but there is a tipping point where the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable. I love the fact that there is a mix of condos, townhomes, and single family homes in my neighborhood, but it's a balance and if it were to tip over into primarily big buildings with condos, it would lose what makes it special. It is nice to have neighborhoods like Navy Yard for people who choose that lifestyle, but it's also ok for other neighborhoods to have a predominance of single family homes. Our city can have different types of neighborhoods.

What you mean by "the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable" is "it's not what I would want." However, you are not everyone, and land use should not be based on your - or my, or anyone's - personal preferences.

Sorry. Agree 100% with previous post. DC should avoid changing radically the character of NWDC. Those residents pay the bills in DC and are entirely why DC has done economically well until recently. Moreover, there are plenty of places in DC where larger condo or apartment buildings can be built. There simply is no need to push the balance to a tipping point.

How would adding housing on commercial corridors radically change the character of NWDC? No one is talking about putting massive apartment buildings in the side streets.

How would adding thousands of new people (units) to a 2-mile stretch change the character of the neighborhoods immediately adjacent to that corridor? Are you seriously asking this question?

Yes, I am. Do the apartment buildings on Connecticut near Woodley Park and Cleveland Park make the SFH blocks there worse somehow?

Well, when they are stuffed full of unscreened voucher recipients they do .

People have already answered your question - schools, traffic, light, nuisance tenants if Frumin is involved, aesthetics (depending on what's put up - it's not always the best architecture), parking, misplaced focus on more residences not commerce and dining which is far more needed, etc etc

Imagine going to a public meeting and expressing your opinion that property owners shouldn't be allowed to build apartment buildings because you think apartment buildings are ugly and you don't like the people who might live there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that NWDC neighborhoods are so appealing that we should densify them so more people can live there. What the proponents get wrong is what makes the neighborhoods appealing -- safe residential areas with green space and good schools. Of course, you can add some density to those areas, but there is a tipping point where the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable. I love the fact that there is a mix of condos, townhomes, and single family homes in my neighborhood, but it's a balance and if it were to tip over into primarily big buildings with condos, it would lose what makes it special. It is nice to have neighborhoods like Navy Yard for people who choose that lifestyle, but it's also ok for other neighborhoods to have a predominance of single family homes. Our city can have different types of neighborhoods.

What you mean by "the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable" is "it's not what I would want." However, you are not everyone, and land use should not be based on your - or my, or anyone's - personal preferences.

Sorry. Agree 100% with previous post. DC should avoid changing radically the character of NWDC. Those residents pay the bills in DC and are entirely why DC has done economically well until recently. Moreover, there are plenty of places in DC where larger condo or apartment buildings can be built. There simply is no need to push the balance to a tipping point.

How would adding housing on commercial corridors radically change the character of NWDC? No one is talking about putting massive apartment buildings in the side streets.

How would adding thousands of new people (units) to a 2-mile stretch change the character of the neighborhoods immediately adjacent to that corridor? Are you seriously asking this question?

Yes, I am. Do the apartment buildings on Connecticut near Woodley Park and Cleveland Park make the SFH blocks there worse somehow?

Well, when they are stuffed full of unscreened voucher recipients they do .

People have already answered your question - schools, traffic, light, nuisance tenants if Frumin is involved, aesthetics (depending on what's put up - it's not always the best architecture), parking, misplaced focus on more residences not commerce and dining which is far more needed, etc etc

Imagine going to a public meeting and expressing your opinion that property owners shouldn't be allowed to build apartment buildings because you think apartment buildings are ugly and you don't like the people who might live there.

This is why public input is just performative.

99% of people just care about the apartment layouts and that the building has been constructed properly. Howeve, you attend a meeting and it’s a lot of nonsense that the city rightfully ignores.

Just like the 1% that thought the old Mazza was some wonderful design vs the 99% that thought it looked like a large box. Would have been nice if they could have rehabbed what was there as assume that might have been quicker…but nobody really cares they knocked it down and started over.

[Anonymous]

I think more than 1% of people care about more than layout. That's insane. And yes, I care about putting too many voucher holders in any one building or one neighborhood. The number of voucher holders in NW has led to an increase in violent crime, theft, panhandling, public drug use and has affected the quality of life. We all should care about her neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think more than 1% of people care about more than layout. That's insane. And yes, I care about putting too many voucher holders in any one building or one neighborhood. The number of voucher holders in NW has led to an increase in violent crime, theft, panhandling, public drug use and has affected the quality of life. We all should care about her neighborhoods.

You are describing the occupants…completely different issue.

You are wrong about how many people care about the look and design of buildings…but hey I will give you 2%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, Trader Joe's is coming to Chevy Chase Pavillion.

FH could be incredible if it was connected on the MD side. You could create another Reston Town Center or whatever they call the area in Rockville/North Bethesda with the REI and LL Bean.

You have a wasted surface lot behind the new Mazza replacement, wasted surface lot at the Saks in CC MD. You have the Lord & Taylor site...it seems crazy to turn that into the new bus depot...although I guess that opens up development of the current bus depot.

It needs to be far more mixed-use...apartments, retail, entertainment (Dave & Busters, Pinstripes type places), etc.

I don't know about Reston Town Center, but Pike and Rose has way more parking than anything in DC should have. Or, really, that anything in North Bethesda should have.

Funny how many cars with DC tags I see when I walk to Pike and Rose.

I love Pike and Rose. I drive there from DC. I'd much rather go there than Georgetown. Pike and Rose is the only development that got it right, in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

I have a very different view. I had to drive to Pike and Rose one day during the holiday season, and I could not stand the development. I regularly go to Georgetown and Bethesda for shopping and a bit to eat. I love the stores and the lower scale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more than 1% of people care about more than layout. That's insane. And yes, I care about putting too many voucher holders in any one building or one neighborhood. The number of voucher holders in NW has led to an increase in violent crime, theft, panhandling, public drug use and has affected the quality of life. We all should care about her neighborhoods.

You are describing the occupants…completely different issue.

You are wrong about how many people care about the look and design of buildings…but hey I will give you 2%

People really don't care at all what buildings look like? I care about whether there is green space around them, whether the exteriors are flat or broken up with interesting windows and balconies, whether the materials used are solid or cheap. I also care about streetscape, and I suspect others do as well. I notice that in Arlington, the busiest restaurants are still the ones in the lower scale (and older) parts of the neighborhoods. I do think people care about aesthetics and scale. There are lovely examples of apartments buildings in DC and terrible examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more than 1% of people care about more than layout. That's insane. And yes, I care about putting too many voucher holders in any one building or one neighborhood. The number of voucher holders in NW has led to an increase in violent crime, theft, panhandling, public drug use and has affected the quality of life. We all should care about her neighborhoods.

You are describing the occupants…completely different issue.

You are wrong about how many people care about the look and design of buildings…but hey I will give you 2%

People really don't care at all what buildings look like? I care about whether there is green space around them, whether the exteriors are flat or broken up with interesting windows and balconies, whether the materials used are solid or cheap. I also care about streetscape, and I suspect others do as well. I notice that in Arlington, the busiest restaurants are still the ones in the lower scale (and older) parts of the neighborhoods. I do think people care about aesthetics and scale. There are lovely examples of apartments buildings in DC and terrible examples.

I care about how buildings look, but I don't think people should get to build or not build buildings based on my personal sense of aesthetics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a very different view. I had to drive to Pike and Rose one day during the holiday season, and I could not stand the development. I regularly go to Georgetown and Bethesda for shopping and a bit to eat. I love the stores and the lower scale.

The "lower scale" of shopping in downtown Bethesda compared to Pike and Rose?!

[Anonymous]

Bethesda Row specifically

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more than 1% of people care about more than layout. That's insane. And yes, I care about putting too many voucher holders in any one building or one neighborhood. The number of voucher holders in NW has led to an increase in violent crime, theft, panhandling, public drug use and has affected the quality of life. We all should care about her neighborhoods.

You are describing the occupants…completely different issue.

You are wrong about how many people care about the look and design of buildings…but hey I will give you 2%

People really don't care at all what buildings look like? I care about whether there is green space around them, whether the exteriors are flat or broken up with interesting windows and balconies, whether the materials used are solid or cheap. I also care about streetscape, and I suspect others do as well. I notice that in Arlington, the busiest restaurants are still the ones in the lower scale (and older) parts of the neighborhoods. I do think people care about aesthetics and scale. There are lovely examples of apartments buildings in DC and terrible examples.

Sure 1% to 2% of people care...but unless you are willing to put up $$$s and develop something yourself, your cares are irrelevant. I care if a restaurant or hardware store opens vs. another bank (WTF is with all the banks!?)...but unless I am willing to put up $$$s to open a business, my cares are irrelevant.

You clearly don't know Arlington or spend much time in Arlington...the areas up near Glebe Road are very crowded, as are the areas you refer. However, none of that has anything to do with the scale or anything. It has to do with what specific restaurants and shops are there and the density of those restaurants and shops.