Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

+1000%

Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty clear that the survey has way oversampled single family homeowners and as well as those over 60. In other words, this is pretty meaningless given the overall demographics of that area.

This is the demographics of that area...

Let people decide what happens in their backyard. Homeowners should also have a greater say given all the property tax that is collected from their homes..

Perhaps keeping a lock on single family only development in the area has contributed to those demographic patterns persisting over the last ... century ... where other parts of the city are far more diverse? Perhaps??

Aren’t there a number of apartment buildings in Chevy Chase DC, particularly Connecticut Ave including from Nebraska north to Maryland? This notion of a “lock on single family development” is a complete red herring.

There are more people who live in those buildings than in the single family homes. Yet, the SFH respondents dwarf the apartment renters in the survey results. Hence why the survey is totally meaningless.

First of all, who is to assume how people may respond to a survey based on their housing situation. Second, why wouldn’t folks on apartments respond?

Because there is no amount of reality the YIMBYs won’t reject to suit their purposes. Despite the many solutions to deal with housing, they just won’t stop tilting at that SFH zoning windmill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

Then run for office on that platform.

In the real world, the proper process and law has been followed.

Any process that has 49% of the people hating 51% of the people is bad government. But you do you.

Not only is it bad policy it's also the exact opposite of what the role of an ANC is.

Also remember that these same people are opposed to any sort of neighborhood referendum on any of these issues. But as long as notices were posted in the classified section of El Tiempo and two telephone polls then it is a ok.

our laws and process are not established or set up for 'rule by referendum' - that is why we have ANCs and Councilmembers.

That's why we have Councilmembers and referendums. ANCs are not legislative bodies. Their purpose is to help citizens access government services not to make policy.

The purpose of the ANC is to get the leaves picked up on time and street lightbulbs replaced. The actual council didn’t want to deal with neighborhood gadfly’s so the ANCs were created to shield them from the grunt work. The current ANC commissioners somehow think they’ve been elected to the politburo.

Actually, the ANCs were written into the DC Charter because the congressman from Minneapolis thought their cities' model was a good one for DC Home Rule. The councilmembers did no such thing. Can you stick to facts please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

Then run for office on that platform.

In the real world, the proper process and law has been followed.

Any process that has 49% of the people hating 51% of the people is bad government. But you do you.

Not only is it bad policy it's also the exact opposite of what the role of an ANC is.

Also remember that these same people are opposed to any sort of neighborhood referendum on any of these issues. But as long as notices were posted in the classified section of El Tiempo and two telephone polls then it is a ok.

our laws and process are not established or set up for 'rule by referendum' - that is why we have ANCs and Councilmembers.

That's why we have Councilmembers and referendums. ANCs are not legislative bodies. Their purpose is to help citizens access government services not to make policy.

The purpose of the ANC is to get the leaves picked up on time and street lightbulbs replaced. The actual council didn’t want to deal with neighborhood gadfly’s so the ANCs were created to shield them from the grunt work. The current ANC commissioners somehow think they’ve been elected to the politburo.

Some ANC commissioners act like they’re to the left of most communist politburo members.

Are you posting from 1989?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

Then run for office on that platform.

In the real world, the proper process and law has been followed.

Any process that has 49% of the people hating 51% of the people is bad government. But you do you.

Not only is it bad policy it's also the exact opposite of what the role of an ANC is.

Also remember that these same people are opposed to any sort of neighborhood referendum on any of these issues. But as long as notices were posted in the classified section of El Tiempo and two telephone polls then it is a ok.

our laws and process are not established or set up for 'rule by referendum' - that is why we have ANCs and Councilmembers.

That's why we have Councilmembers and referendums. ANCs are not legislative bodies. Their purpose is to help citizens access government services not to make policy.

The purpose of the ANC is to get the leaves picked up on time and street lightbulbs replaced. The actual council didn’t want to deal with neighborhood gadfly’s so the ANCs were created to shield them from the grunt work. The current ANC commissioners somehow think they’ve been elected to the politburo.

Some ANC commissioners act like they’re to the left of most communist politburo members.

Are you posting from 1989?

Some of the "progressive" ANC members were not born by 1989.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

Then run for office on that platform.

In the real world, the proper process and law has been followed.

Any process that has 49% of the people hating 51% of the people is bad government. But you do you.

Not only is it bad policy it's also the exact opposite of what the role of an ANC is.

Also remember that these same people are opposed to any sort of neighborhood referendum on any of these issues. But as long as notices were posted in the classified section of El Tiempo and two telephone polls then it is a ok.

our laws and process are not established or set up for 'rule by referendum' - that is why we have ANCs and Councilmembers.

That's why we have Councilmembers and referendums. ANCs are not legislative bodies. Their purpose is to help citizens access government services not to make policy.

The purpose of the ANC is to get the leaves picked up on time and street lightbulbs replaced. The actual council didn’t want to deal with neighborhood gadfly’s so the ANCs were created to shield them from the grunt work. The current ANC commissioners somehow think they’ve been elected to the politburo.

Some ANC commissioners act like they’re to the left of most communist politburo members.

Are you posting from 1989?

Some of the "progressive" ANC members were not born by 1989.

Is that a problem for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really, any major zoning change should require a supermajority of support. Making neighborhood changes with 51% of support in either direction is short sighted.

Then run for office on that platform.

In the real world, the proper process and law has been followed.

Any process that has 49% of the people hating 51% of the people is bad government. But you do you.

Not only is it bad policy it's also the exact opposite of what the role of an ANC is.

Also remember that these same people are opposed to any sort of neighborhood referendum on any of these issues. But as long as notices were posted in the classified section of El Tiempo and two telephone polls then it is a ok.

our laws and process are not established or set up for 'rule by referendum' - that is why we have ANCs and Councilmembers.

That's why we have Councilmembers and referendums. ANCs are not legislative bodies. Their purpose is to help citizens access government services not to make policy.

It's both, actually.

An ANC (Advisory Neighborhood Commission) is a non-partisan, neighborhood body each made up of locally elected representatives called Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners. They are a unique feature of the District's Home Rule Charter.

The Commissioners, who serve two-year terms without pay, are elected in November in even-numbered years (e.g. 2022). The ANCs were established to bring government closer to the people, and to bring the people closer to government.

In addition to providing people with a greater say in the matters that affect their neighborhoods, ANCs were intended to end the duplication of effort caused by the proliferation of special advisory groups.

https://anc.dc.gov/page/about-ancs

You might want to read that again. There is nothing in there about making policy or pretending to be legislators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

I’m sure you would care if it was a homeless shelter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty clear that the survey has way oversampled single family homeowners and as well as those over 60. In other words, this is pretty meaningless given the overall demographics of that area.

This is the demographics of that area...

Let people decide what happens in their backyard. Homeowners should also have a greater say given all the property tax that is collected from their homes..

No. That's not how it should work, and that's not how it does work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

I’m sure you would care if it was a homeless shelter.

But that isn't what is being proposed, is it, now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the ANC in 3/4G finally got around to surveying the community and it looks like us folks at the Chevy Chase Voice were better at getting our people out in force to respond. We defeated the GGG/WABA people who tried as usual to stack the deck with outside ANC votes against the actual community's wishes. So now the mayor will cancel this project, right?


https://anc3g.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CCLS-Survey-Overall-Summary-Data.pdf

I completed the survey and voted for redevelopment of the community center / library without housing. HOWEVER, the survey didn't drill down to maybe the next level and ask if I was in favor of redevelopment with housing if that is the only way to get the community center / library redeveloped. I am a 100% yes answer to that question as well.

The current community center / library are awful...I will agree to just about anything built on top of brand new, modern facilities if that is the only way to get those facilities.

To other posters suggesting that somehow a super majority of the community needs to agree to development, that is utter nonsense. NOTHING would ever get built anywhere if that was a standard. This is why zoning laws exist.

So you completed the survey and the results didn’t agree with your opinion so there is something wrong with the methodology? This is hilarious.

No, just that I am not alone in believing it is a binary choice. My preference is to have a new community center / library without housing...but without a doubt my highest preference is to have a new community center / library no matter what. If something has to be built on top in order to make it happen, then I honestly couldnt' care less what gets built on top.

My problem is the mayor holding replacement of the library and community center hostage to giving a public asset away on lucrative terms to a favored crony developer. That smells.

Uh, the mayor had money in the budget 5 years ago for this, and the ANC asked her to hold off because it proposed adding the affordable housing. You have it backwards. The community asked for this and now a bunch of blue hair cranks are up in arms of basically nothing.