Anonymous wrote:This is one instance where I am glad the city will railroad this through.

Sorry everyone that thinks screaming into DCUM will change anything.

Anonymous wrote:You live in a fantasy land. Do you mean I live in idyllic setting? In that sense, yes I live in a fantasy land in the tonniest Upper NW. It’s leafy, historic and covenanted. I’m not shaking any fists but you aren’t getting your hands on my property just so we’re clear.

Anonymous wrote:Covenants will; and huge parts of Upper NW with the most land are 😜

Add in historic and you can keep railroading yourselves as you have been

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You will love the fact that Frumin’s house is in a covenant-protected block; so he’s not inclined to care any more than he usually does, which is not at all

The Google street view of his house has a Cheh campaign sign in the yard.

Anonymous wrote:Someone upstream said that the proposal includes introducing density inside the neighborhoods off the Wisconsin Avenue within half mile of a bus route. That would include massive parts of our SFH zoned blocks. That’s a very different proposal. Can anyone provide more details?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument is that NWDC neighborhoods are so appealing that we should densify them so more people can live there. What the proponents get wrong is what makes the neighborhoods appealing -- safe residential areas with green space and good schools. Of course, you can add some density to those areas, but there is a tipping point where the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable. I love the fact that there is a mix of condos, townhomes, and single family homes in my neighborhood, but it's a balance and if it were to tip over into primarily big buildings with condos, it would lose what makes it special. It is nice to have neighborhoods like Navy Yard for people who choose that lifestyle, but it's also ok for other neighborhoods to have a predominance of single family homes. Our city can have different types of neighborhoods.

What you mean by "the neighborhoods will no longer be desirable" is "it's not what I would want." However, you are not everyone, and land use should not be based on your - or my, or anyone's - personal preferences.

Sorry. Agree 100% with previous post. DC should avoid changing radically the character of NWDC. Those residents pay the bills in DC and are entirely why DC has done economically well until recently. Moreover, there are plenty of places in DC where larger condo or apartment buildings can be built. There simply is no need to push the balance to a tipping point.

How would adding housing on commercial corridors radically change the character of NWDC? No one is talking about putting massive apartment buildings in the side streets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You will love the fact that Frumin’s house is in a covenant-protected block; so he’s not inclined to care any more than he usually does, which is not at all

He’s strangely silent on affordable housing at the former Super Fresh sight. Wonder why?

Anonymous wrote:You will love the fact that Frumin’s house is in a covenant-protected block; so he’s not inclined to care any more than he usually does, which is not at all

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

How would Northwest DC stay 'desirable' with this plan obliterate the SFHs, low density and green space? Is there just some magic pixie dust in NW DC that makes it desirable NO MATTER WHAT? At that point, Anacostia will become fully desirable, with its rolling hills, underenrolled schools and plenty o' SFH. People want to move to NW for a reason, and when the reason is gone--that it's a pleasant place to live -they will go too.

All of this. The schools are a huge draw too. If they decline, are over-enrolled, etc., there goes the tax base.

The dismantling of Ward 3 puzzles me for this reason. It's like eating the golden goose. Reasonable measures like homeless shelters and vouchers with oversight and supports would make sense...but that's not what has occurred. Razing SFHs and relentlessly building more condos is just going to further corrode the appeal of gracious neighborhoods in NW DC that already have a mixture of Sfh, duplex (we live in one), multiplex, apartments and condos. When we drove down Wisconsin to our home I said to my family, I will miss this - the city is unique with it's low buildings (which the density bros hate), setbacks (which the density bros despise), wide Blvd, view of the cathedral, trees, parks, libraries that are just... libraries, strollability. This is city wide. This is what the density bros want to destroy. Without that, there's not a lot to miss. We were coming home from looking at SFH in MD for what it's worth, where yes development is happening but the Sfh are being replaced by newer, bulkier Sfh... Not apartments. The house we were looking at is tasteful, fwiw, and the neighborhood smells better. Density bros plus urban blight promoting policy are systemically destroying NW DC, and all of DC.

Except this whole thread is about condos and what not on Wisconsin Avenue..there is no proposal regarding changing zoning and tearing down SFHs to erect apartments. Wisconsin Avenue is commercial and apartments/multi family housing. There aren’t SFHs in Wisconsin in FHs.

Unfortunately, this DCUM and everyone goes off on strange and imaginary tangents which distract from the thread.

The density bros have pushed multiplexes on the sfhs, eliminating set backs, eliminating height limits, replacing lower buildings on Wisconsin with higher--we have lots of charming, low commercial strips. A recent development knocked down some Sfhs on wisconsin and replaced them with a multiplex with bedrooms so small they are basically unfit for habitation. Our schools are overcrowded. The city has made a disaster with vouchers, so I regard any talk of more low income housing with trepidation. All of this impacts the whole neighborhood including SFHs.

How many SFHs are located ON Wisconsin Avenue…there were maybe 3-5 on a stretch down near the Cathedral Heights development…and literally that is it on the entire stretch from Western to M street.

Again, there are no SFHs on Wisconsin.

The development either makes economic sense and will happen, or it doesn’t and it won’t.