Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

The city wants to take its own property and put it to better use for more people that includes housing, a new community center and new library. Why is this a bad thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

The city wants to take its own property and put it to better use for more people that includes housing, a new community center and new library. Why is this a bad thing?

Because the City’s efforts to date to provide housing along the Connecticut Avenue corridor has been an unmitigated disaster.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

The city wants to take its own property and put it to better use for more people that includes housing, a new community center and new library. Why is this a bad thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

The city wants to take its own property and put it to better use for more people that includes housing, a new community center and new library. Why is this a bad thing?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People who buy a home have invested in the location for l the long term, so they care and respond to surveys. Most renters are transient, short term residents who apparently do not care enough to respond. So the response is meaningful.

I think that the only fair thing to do would be to put such things on a ballot.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

People who buy a home have invested in the location for l the long term, so they care and respond to surveys. Most renters are transient, short term residents who apparently do not care enough to respond. So the response is meaningful.

I think that the only fair thing to do would be to put such things on a ballot.

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

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.

People who buy a home have invested in the location for l the long term, so they care and respond to surveys. Most renters are transient, short term residents who apparently do not care enough to respond. So the response is meaningful.

Anonymous wrote:Chevy Chase DC on Connecticut Avenue is almost the perfect village shopping district in the city. Its mixture of neighborhood-serving retail and dining options is quite nice, as is the pedestrian scale. I don’t understand the imperative of downtown DC planners to turn this attractive area in to Friendship Heights East. Is their planning goal that every Washington neighborhood should become a generic riff on the Navy Yard?

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.

People who buy a home have invested in the location for l the long term, so they care and respond to surveys. Most renters are transient, short term residents who apparently do not care enough to respond. So the response is meaningful.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Even if true, a lot has changed in five years. The voucher fiasco, crime spiraling, DC’s tepid response. No one trusts DC to manage this well for the community.

The proposed housing is not voucher housing. Why do you assume people who want to live in affordable housing cause crime? This housing is designed for people who work at Broadbrnach Market or at the fire station down the street, or at Lafayette as a teacher or building engineer. Do you think those people are engaged in the crime spree?

Why are we building apartments for the Chevy Chase MARYLAND fire department? While I appreciate that Maryland covers us in DC perhaps it might be better to build a fire or police station of our own.

Fessenden and CT is your friend.

So is knowing that BCC and Chevy Chase cover part of that area. The world does not revolve Cleveland Park.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GGW published an article last week talking about how many units we could create if we replaced every single family home with a five story apartment building. I think it's pretty clear that they want to get rid of single family zoning.

Who's going to live in these places? The reason why vouchers are thriving on Connecticut Ave is because they can't find enough paying occupants.

That is not true. The reason why vouchers are thriving is because vouchers actually pay higher than market rents...as much as 20% higher. The program needs to be completely revamped because of the perverse incentives from the program.

This is no longer true, and it's against federal law for vouchers to pay higher than market rate. DC stopped paying higher than market rate after WaPo exposed the practice.

OK...but that literally only happened in like the last 3-6 months. The point is that most people think that a voucher rate is below (most probably think well below) market rates, which has not been the case in DC.