Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any other mixed use projects for DCPL?

Yup the new West End Library is part of a mixed use project and it is fantastic - nice library and additional housing and the tax revenues that come with it. Win Win for the city and neighborhood.

Zoning and density are different downtown and in the West End than in Cleveland Park (an historic district) and in Tenleytown. That may not matter to the developer profit-maximimizer mouthpiece known as Greater Greater Washington, but it matters to District residents.

BTW, some of the fantastic, win-win West End housing is right above the new fire station, but those were the statutorily-required 'affordable' units.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep the library there but build 10 or 12 floors of flats, mixture of upscale and affordable. A win-win.

this. But of course CP will argue its about character, never mind that most of Conn Avenue has apartment buidlings. They easily could have added at least 4 stories or housing but then a lot of it would have been affordable and no way are the limo liberals in CP allowing that to happen.

You might be surprised that the second highest number of rent controlled units in the entire city are in Ward 3, and many of them are in or near Cleveland Park, along Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues. The older apartment buildings definitely provide a lot of more affordable units. The irony is that the GGW/Smart Growth crowd wants to upzone the avenues further for downtown height and density. This would mean that these affordable buildings and rent controlled units would be replaced by upscale condos and flats, with relatively little 'inclusive zoning' units (which by the way are NOT the same thing as affordable or RC units) to compensate.

And if you had half a brain you'd know that 1)DC has very few rent controlled apartments and 2) there are no income requirements to get a rent controlled apartment.

Which is another way of saying rent controlled apartments are utterly irrelevant when it comes to talking about the mix of affordable units in DC so this argument you keep making on here about Ward 3's rent controlled apartments being under threat is just absurd - particularly because there is no reason to believe that the units are under threat!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know they tried mixed use at the Tenley Friendship library but couldn’t get a developer to reach an agreement. Any other mixed use buildings including a library and apartments?

Wrong, the NIMBYs totally killed it. They city even invested a million dollars into extra supports in the library to accommodate the extra density.

There was a handshake deal at the time to give the condo opportunity to a well connected crony developer. Moreover, the project would have required taking some of the Janney playground. Stinkage and shrinkage killed the project. Cheh was an initial supporter, until public opinion turned solidly against it.

OMG do we need to re-litigate this? It did not net out to a loss of Janney playspace. But you know that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any other mixed use projects for DCPL?

Yup the new West End Library is part of a mixed use project and it is fantastic - nice library and additional housing and the tax revenues that come with it. Win Win for the city and neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep the library there but build 10 or 12 floors of flats, mixture of upscale and affordable. A win-win.

this. But of course CP will argue its about character, never mind that most of Conn Avenue has apartment buidlings. They easily could have added at least 4 stories or housing but then a lot of it would have been affordable and no way are the limo liberals in CP allowing that to happen.

You might be surprised that the second highest number of rent controlled units in the entire city are in Ward 3, and many of them are in or near Cleveland Park, along Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues. The older apartment buildings definitely provide a lot of more affordable units. The irony is that the GGW/Smart Growth crowd wants to upzone the avenues further for downtown height and density. This would mean that these affordable buildings and rent controlled units would be replaced by upscale condos and flats, with relatively little 'inclusive zoning' units (which by the way are NOT the same thing as affordable or RC units) to compensate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Literally Conn. Ave is lined with buildings from the White House to Chevy Chase. I’ll even hazard a guess and say it’s the most densely populated thoroughfare in DC so you need to recognize.

The so-called Smart Growthers/GGW echo chamber call Comm. ave. a “density hole.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep the library there but build 10 or 12 floors of flats, mixture of upscale and affordable. A win-win.

this. But of course CP will argue its about character, never mind that most of Conn Avenue has apartment buidlings. They easily could have added at least 4 stories or housing but then a lot of it would have been affordable and no way are the limo liberals in CP allowing that to happen.

You might be surprised that the second highest number of rent controlled units in the entire city are in Ward 3, and many of them are in or near Cleveland Park, along Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues. The older apartment buildings definitely provide a lot of more affordable units. The irony is that the GGW/Smart Growth crowd wants to upzone the avenues further for downtown height and density. This would mean that these affordable buildings and rent controlled units would be replaced by upscale condos and flats, with relatively little 'inclusive zoning' units (which by the way are NOT the same thing as affordable or RC units) to compensate.

I think their criticism is more that you have SFHs starting immediately behind the first row of large buildings on Connecticut Ave. It's a bit ridiculous that 100 feet from CT Ave you have a sea of SFHs. They should allow upzoning of the SFH blocks immediately adjacent to CT Ave.

Why destroy one of the nicest neighborhoods in the city to turn it into a generic copy of Van Ness East or Cathedral Commons?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know they tried mixed use at the Tenley Friendship library but couldn’t get a developer to reach an agreement. Any other mixed use buildings including a library and apartments?

Wrong, the NIMBYs totally killed it. They city even invested a million dollars into extra supports in the library to accommodate the extra density.

There was a handshake deal at the time to give the condo opportunity to a well connected crony developer. Moreover, the project would have required taking some of the Janney playground. Stinkage and shrinkage killed the project. Cheh was an initial supporter, until public opinion turned solidly against it.

Anonymous wrote:Any other mixed use projects for DCPL?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know they tried mixed use at the Tenley Friendship library but couldn’t get a developer to reach an agreement. Any other mixed use buildings including a library and apartments?

Wrong, the NIMBYs totally killed it. They city even invested a million dollars into extra supports in the library to accommodate the extra density.

Anonymous wrote:I know they tried mixed use at the Tenley Friendship library but couldn’t get a developer to reach an agreement. Any other mixed use buildings including a library and apartments?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep the library there but build 10 or 12 floors of flats, mixture of upscale and affordable. A win-win.

this. But of course CP will argue its about character, never mind that most of Conn Avenue has apartment buidlings. They easily could have added at least 4 stories or housing but then a lot of it would have been affordable and no way are the limo liberals in CP allowing that to happen.

You might be surprised that the second highest number of rent controlled units in the entire city are in Ward 3, and many of them are in or near Cleveland Park, along Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues. The older apartment buildings definitely provide a lot of more affordable units. The irony is that the GGW/Smart Growth crowd wants to upzone the avenues further for downtown height and density. This would mean that these affordable buildings and rent controlled units would be replaced by upscale condos and flats, with relatively little 'inclusive zoning' units (which by the way are NOT the same thing as affordable or RC units) to compensate.

I think their criticism is more that you have SFHs starting immediately behind the first row of large buildings on Connecticut Ave. It's a bit ridiculous that 100 feet from CT Ave you have a sea of SFHs. They should allow upzoning of the SFH blocks immediately adjacent to CT Ave.