Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people who oppose the proposals for redevelopment of the Chevy Chase Community Center, but ALSO oppose the historic district is rather large and very surprising.

Why? It makes a lot of sense.

They don't want new development, they also don't want preservation. They don't want anything. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

It’s like saying I was planning to buy a Mercedes anyway, so what’s the big deal if everyone has to buy a Mercedes…it’s a better car anyway.

I don’t know…maybe because historic district windows (as just one example) can easily run $40,000+ for a whole house window replacement vs $20,000 for top vinyl windows. Oh, and absolutely nobody cares about those vinyl windows. How do I know…because a number of people sending in letters supporting the district have 100% vinyl windows…which look nice…ands again, nobody cares.

So, how to reconcile the hypocrisy of those that have already made all their non-HPO approved modifications as they smugly now try to impose those on the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

That’s a load of BS. There is nothing that needs “stabilizing”…and it absolutely is being promoted as a tool to block/impede the community center development.

Just be honest about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

It’s like saying I was planning to buy a Mercedes anyway, so what’s the big deal if everyone has to buy a Mercedes…it’s a better car anyway.

I don’t know…maybe because historic district windows (as just one example) can easily run $40,000+ for a whole house window replacement vs $20,000 for top vinyl windows. Oh, and absolutely nobody cares about those vinyl windows. How do I know…because a number of people sending in letters supporting the district have 100% vinyl windows…which look nice…ands again, nobody cares.

So, how to reconcile the hypocrisy of those that have already made all their non-HPO approved modifications as they smugly now try to impose those on the rest of us.

Also, one of the founders of the CC DC Conservancy lives in a 1970s duplex that is a non-contributing property…talk about the nth level of hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

"Why not" is not really a good reason to do something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

That’s a load of BS. There is nothing that needs “stabilizing”…and it absolutely is being promoted as a tool to block/impede the community center development.

Just be honest about it.

A historic district would provide some additional protection to some wonderful older buildings along Connecticut Avenue that aren't currently listed landmarks. But the community center and library would not under any scenario qualify as contributing structures because they are not in the period of significance. So your statement is not correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people who oppose the proposals for redevelopment of the Chevy Chase Community Center, but ALSO oppose the historic district is rather large and very surprising.

Why? It makes a lot of sense.

They don't want new development, they also don't want preservation. They don't want anything. Sad.

No. It means they're stuck between two competing sets of fools and like things as they are now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

That’s a load of BS. There is nothing that needs “stabilizing”…and it absolutely is being promoted as a tool to block/impede the community center development.

Just be honest about it.

A historic district would provide some additional protection to some wonderful older buildings along Connecticut Avenue that aren't currently listed landmarks. But the community center and library would not under any scenario qualify as contributing structures because they are not in the period of significance. So your statement is not correct.

No, you are slanting the argument with 1/2 truths.

Non-contributing structures are still much, much harder to raze, which is what will happen in the new development. They aren’t just renovating what’s there and building on top.

Also, the new development will be subject to all kinds of rules and regulations from the historic district. They can’t just build what they think is the best, most efficient, most cost effective design.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick Question--drove by the Omni in Woodley Park. What on earth is being built in that huge chasm by Oyster School (while we are speaking of development)? Seems like a lot of 're-development' on CT cooridor, geeze!

Omni is on Calvert. You are referring to the former Wardman Marriot site:

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/900-apartments-proposed-for-former-wardman-marriott-site/19189

You can see it as you approach the Omni from Calvert. the chasm is massive. How is it that the sentiment persists that there is no housing/development in Ward 3? All is see is housing/development

It could be developed with more density there. Their iare potential housing units left on the table.

Zoning wouldn't allow for more density and the city didn't buy it, so it will have a minima amount of affordable housing units. I think the developers lost an opportunity to extend the Woodley Park commercial area up into the property. Oh well.

DC requires only 8 to 10 percent affordable units even in large developments and then is surprised that progress is so incremental. Other cities require more, even much more. But the DC government is so captive to development interests that it is unlikely that it will raise its baseline mandate. So they just seek more and more market rate apartments and condos in the hope that a few more crumbs of affordable housing will trickle down.

Having seen the voucher mess, I am just fine with less affordable housing. 8 to 10 percent sounds fine. What's funny is that they are building so little for middle income families--just tiny luxury condos. It's like this city doesn't want middle income families or something.

Why do you equate vouchers with affordable housing? They are two different things.

Also, not everyone on vouchers causes problems. Just like there are people not on vouchers who do cause problems.

Because vouchers that wiped out EXISTING rent controlled affordable housing sent a message across the bow that this city does not value affordable housing. Only vouchers. So I'm over both at this point. "fooled me once" etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

That’s a load of BS. There is nothing that needs “stabilizing”…and it absolutely is being promoted as a tool to block/impede the community center development.

Just be honest about it.

Have you seen the development in the Shaw Historic District? Or the 14th Street Historic District? Or the Anacostia Historic District? Being in a historic District does not block or impede development. If that is the reason the proponents have filed their application, they will be in for a surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

It’s like saying I was planning to buy a Mercedes anyway, so what’s the big deal if everyone has to buy a Mercedes…it’s a better car anyway.

I don’t know…maybe because historic district windows (as just one example) can easily run $40,000+ for a whole house window replacement vs $20,000 for top vinyl windows. Oh, and absolutely nobody cares about those vinyl windows. How do I know…because a number of people sending in letters supporting the district have 100% vinyl windows…which look nice…ands again, nobody cares.

So, how to reconcile the hypocrisy of those that have already made all their non-HPO approved modifications as they smugly now try to impose those on the rest of us.

How quaint. A house in Chevy Chase costs no less than a million dollars. The extra 20k for actually good windows is pocket change at those rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My family made the opposite choice -- to live in a historic district. I agree that the city is big enough to have both to give people choices.

The same. We value having a historic district in the neighborhood. And when we renovated and enlarged our house the process was not burdensome at all.

+1

The hysteria from the people opposed to historic designation is rather astounding. It really isn't that big of a deal, and frankly, it generally improves the overall quality of home renovations.

So why do it?

Why not? There are a lot of unique neighborhoods in DC, Chevy Chase is one of them. Why not celebrate a streetcar suburb of DC? It won't impact the proposals for the community center, but it will "stabilize" the 100+ year old homes on either side of CT Ave.

That’s a load of BS. There is nothing that needs “stabilizing”…and it absolutely is being promoted as a tool to block/impede the community center development.

Just be honest about it.

A historic district would provide some additional protection to some wonderful older buildings along Connecticut Avenue that aren't currently listed landmarks. But the community center and library would not under any scenario qualify as contributing structures because they are not in the period of significance. So your statement is not correct.

No, you are slanting the argument with 1/2 truths.

Non-contributing structures are still much, much harder to raze, which is what will happen in the new development. They aren’t just renovating what’s there and building on top.

Also, the new development will be subject to all kinds of rules and regulations from the historic district. They can’t just build what they think is the best, most efficient, most cost effective design.

This is false. There is ZERO protection for non-contributing structures in historic districts.

The new development would undergo design review as part of the process if it were in a historic district, but given a lack of guidelines or prevailing architecturual styles in Chevy Chase, there is almost nothing guiding what could go there, so it is really a non-issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick Question--drove by the Omni in Woodley Park. What on earth is being built in that huge chasm by Oyster School (while we are speaking of development)? Seems like a lot of 're-development' on CT cooridor, geeze!

Omni is on Calvert. You are referring to the former Wardman Marriot site:

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/900-apartments-proposed-for-former-wardman-marriott-site/19189

You can see it as you approach the Omni from Calvert. the chasm is massive. How is it that the sentiment persists that there is no housing/development in Ward 3? All is see is housing/development

It could be developed with more density there. Their iare potential housing units left on the table.

Zoning wouldn't allow for more density and the city didn't buy it, so it will have a minima amount of affordable housing units. I think the developers lost an opportunity to extend the Woodley Park commercial area up into the property. Oh well.

DC requires only 8 to 10 percent affordable units even in large developments and then is surprised that progress is so incremental. Other cities require more, even much more. But the DC government is so captive to development interests that it is unlikely that it will raise its baseline mandate. So they just seek more and more market rate apartments and condos in the hope that a few more crumbs of affordable housing will trickle down.

Having seen the voucher mess, I am just fine with less affordable housing. 8 to 10 percent sounds fine. What's funny is that they are building so little for middle income families--just tiny luxury condos. It's like this city doesn't want middle income families or something.

Why do you equate vouchers with affordable housing? They are two different things.

Also, not everyone on vouchers causes problems. Just like there are people not on vouchers who do cause problems.

Because vouchers that wiped out EXISTING rent controlled affordable housing sent a message across the bow that this city does not value affordable housing. Only vouchers. So I'm over both at this point. "fooled me once" etc.

They’ve actually fooled us twice. The pro voucher crowed is also largely the defund the police crowd. They now have a bit of a credibility problem.