Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

Here's an article with the photo:
https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/194850

I'm well aware of what you're talking about. A few victorious ANC commissioners who look to be slightly inebriated flipping off a sign that's for people against safer streets. Seems reasonable to me! Still is you beating a dead horse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

Anonymous wrote:

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

Here's an article with the photo:
https://groups.io/g/clevelandpark/message/194850

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

And yet the entirety of the point of all of this is about Military to Western. The immediate neighbors would be the most interested and relevant stakeholders and the survey in fact under-represents them.

But I thought the survey didn’t matter? You should make up your mind.

I think the reason why you’re so upset about it is because you’re starting to realize that you’re on the losing side of this. The zeitgeist is shifting. Your urbanist bro games of manipulating public participation processes are no longer working. And with this, whatever perceived power that you thought you had is quickly disappearing.

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

The southern boundary of the neighborhood of chevy chase DC is most commonly accepted as Nebraska ave, not Military. The ANC 3/4G area even includes almost all of that.

There are 11,026 people who were registered voters in ANC 3/4G in 2022.
2,651 of them live in something that is described as a unit (so condo or apartment). That's roughly 25% of the ANC.
In the survey, 6% were apartment and 4.3% were condos. That's only 10%. That's a huge under-representation.

Note that the boundary of ANC 3/4G does not include the couple large apartment buildings that are in between ChCh Pkwy and Nebraska, although it did before the 2022 redistricting.

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

Those commissioner also posted a selfies showing them disrepecting the local businesses they are meant to serve.

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

ANC Commissioners are almost unanimously unopposed. Because no one cares about that office. Even if you call yourself “Commissioner” in your Twitter profile (which is sad and funny).

If no one cares, then no one should care that they passed unanimous resolutions in favor of safety on Connecticut Avenue, and yet, people are fighting the city on this, when a metric that is more meaningful than a poll that a small fraction of residents responded to, is the every-two-year election of neighborhood representatives.

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..

so when voters vote for ANC Commissioners who want bike lanes almost unanimously up and down CT Ave, you want the city to intervene, but when a crappy survey suggests a very slight majority of respondents, who are but a small fraction of those who live in the area, are opposed to some new affordable housing, we should "let people decide what happens in their backyard"

I sense a touch of hyprocracy. Also, this is city owned land, so the city should decide what happens with it. Yes, the community should have input, but not a trump card.

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.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.

If you’re not going to bother visiting Connecticut from Military to Western, at least look at Google Street View before posting. If anything, the survey probably over represented apartment dwellers and younger people.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There are already tons of apartments around there. So your imaginary fire fighters and teachers already have a lot of multi-family housing options.

How much do you think firefighters and nurses or teachers make? there is a reason they all live in West virginia or deep in Howard country.

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.

Wasn’t this one of the ANCs taken over by GGW and other smart growth AstroTurf groups?

No, it wasn't. There are actually a lot of people in Chevy Chase DC who want this to happen.

“A lot” is still a minority of area residents.

Pro-tip, the anti-housing folks in the survey are also a "minority". There was not a majority opinion expressed on the redevelopment, even given the very skewed selection bias in the survey takers toward older, white, homeowners from SFH's. Wow.