Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer and this would probably be illegal anyway (discrimination based on age) and some other issues, but I honestly feel that once you hit a certain age you should not have a say on things like this.
More specifically, once you hit say 65 (or 70) you should not be able to block developments that will benefit so many people just because you think the historic character will change (or some other bs like that).
You must be a ageist shill for Greater Greater Washington/Ward Smart Growth
Wow you sound unhinged. And no, not a shill for anyone. Just not a fan of super old people objecting to decisions that will positively affect many people, just because they don't want the area that they live in to change (even though they will be leaving that area for either a retirement home or Florida in a few years anyway). It's super selfish frankly to block that Superfresh.
It's like (not the same thing obviously) like the Brexit vote. The old people (majority of old voters) voted to leave the EU for whatever reason (racism), which screwed the younger people who wanted to stay (majority of younger population wanted to stay) and would actually get affected by the decision for many more years than the older folks.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not just people 65+, but yes they do tend to dominate the no change unreasonable people on the ANC 3E meetings I’ve called in to. Younger people are mostly too busy. Also younger people may be in support of development, but are not super worked up about it like the older people who call in - l think it’s a case of the vocal minority dominating. So, as a 40 something who does want to see development, especially on the horribly under used Wisconsin corridor, l would encourage others who are pro development to get more involved. Otherwise the NIMBYs continue to dominate and all we get are vape shops, banks, mattress and frame stores on parts of Wisconsin.
You might sway more neighbors to your vison if you start calling Wisconsin an avenue and not a “corridor.” People don’t want to live in corridors.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer and this would probably be illegal anyway (discrimination based on age) and some other issues, but I honestly feel that once you hit a certain age you should not have a say on things like this.
More specifically, once you hit say 65 (or 70) you should not be able to block developments that will benefit so many people just because you think the historic character will change (or some other bs like that).
You must be a ageist shill for Greater Greater Washington/Ward Smart Growth
Wow you sound unhinged. And no, not a shill for anyone. Just not a fan of super old people objecting to decisions that will positively affect many people, just because they don't want the area that they live in to change (even though they will be leaving that area for either a retirement home or Florida in a few years anyway). It's super selfish frankly to block that Superfresh.
It's like (not the same thing obviously) like the Brexit vote. The old people (majority of old voters) voted to leave the EU for whatever reason (racism), which screwed the younger people who wanted to stay (majority of younger population wanted to stay) and would actually get affected by the decision for many more years than the older folks.
Anonymous wrote:It’s not just people 65+, but yes they do tend to dominate the no change unreasonable people on the ANC 3E meetings I’ve called in to. Younger people are mostly too busy. Also younger people may be in support of development, but are not super worked up about it like the older people who call in - l think it’s a case of the vocal minority dominating. So, as a 40 something who does want to see development, especially on the horribly under used Wisconsin corridor, l would encourage others who are pro development to get more involved. Otherwise the NIMBYs continue to dominate and all we get are vape shops, banks, mattress and frame stores on parts of Wisconsin.
Anonymous wrote:It’s not just people 65+, but yes they do tend to dominate the no change unreasonable people on the ANC 3E meetings I’ve called in to. Younger people are mostly too busy. Also younger people may be in support of development, but are not super worked up about it like the older people who call in - l think it’s a case of the vocal minority dominating. So, as a 40 something who does want to see development, especially on the horribly under used Wisconsin corridor, l would encourage others who are pro development to get more involved. Otherwise the NIMBYs continue to dominate and all we get are vape shops, banks, mattress and frame stores on parts of Wisconsin.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer and this would probably be illegal anyway (discrimination based on age) and some other issues, but I honestly feel that once you hit a certain age you should not have a say on things like this.
More specifically, once you hit say 65 (or 70) you should not be able to block developments that will benefit so many people just because you think the historic character will change (or some other bs like that).
You must be a ageist shill for Greater Greater Washington/Ward Smart Growth
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:After 10 years, the four neighbors (from Wesley Heights and spring valley) have finally lost all legal options. Hopefully Valor can get lending and start soon! https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/219-unit_development_planned_for_au_park_superfresh_site_can_finally_move_f/22151
Are they still alive?
That super fresh was a dump even in the 1990s when I was working in DeCarlos while finishing graduate school.
Anonymous wrote:After 10 years, the four neighbors (from Wesley Heights and spring valley) have finally lost all legal options. Hopefully Valor can get lending and start soon! https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/219-unit_development_planned_for_au_park_superfresh_site_can_finally_move_f/22151
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So weird that Frumin isn’t pushing for affordable/low income housing here. Why is he letting Connecticut Ave have all the fun? Weird.
But will the Lady Bird have pickle ball ?!
Noooooooooo!
Anonymous wrote:I am not a lawyer and this would probably be illegal anyway (discrimination based on age) and some other issues, but I honestly feel that once you hit a certain age you should not have a say on things like this.
More specifically, once you hit say 65 (or 70) you should not be able to block developments that will benefit so many people just because you think the historic character will change (or some other bs like that).