So what is the smoking gun there?

People create groups all the time. Just look at the Committee to Save Johnsons, the Tenley Neighborhood Association, the Friendship Neighborhood Association, the Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Association, the Committee to Stop Overdevelopment, the Association for Rational Development and the list goes on.

People from Ward 3 Vision believe that greater population for the city help support local retail and expand the tax base making our city and neighborhoods better, and that the place to create more housing is in areas where there is existing transit options, and not in the single family neighborhoods. So 5220 Wisconsin Avenue, on top of the Friendship Heights metro station seems like that would make sense.

Does Ward 3 Vision have a bank account to where a developer could "donate" money? Is Ward 3 Vision an incorporated entity?

What proof is there as you claim, that Ward 3 Vision is an astro turf organization being supported by developers? Because to my knowledge, nothing could be further from the truth.

People supporting for more affordable housing and regional environmental concerns by concentrating new development on our retail and transit corridors is a pretty standard and progressive perspective.

It seems like the only people fighting new development are those who want to shut other people out and make housing more expensive by limiting supply.

So who are the greedy ones? The people who build new housing or the ones who are trying to prevent people from living in "their" neighborhoods?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 Vision was exposed some years ago as an "astroturf" -- i.e, faux grass roots - organization that coordinates with large developers and real estate developers. When a major development project was proposed in Upper NW, a Ward 3 Vision leader wrote on what he thought was a private bulletin board that a local-seeming front group be formed to suggest public support for the project. He said that Ward 3 Vision was too controversial to be seen in the lead, but he offered behind the scenes help, writing that Ward 3 Vision had lots of experience in fighting against neighbors. Oops!

That was a story fraught with inaccuracies.

It is a 100% all volunteer group. There is no money involved with it whatsoever and the supporters chip in to put on events and what not.

Please provide proof of what big money is supporting the organization and who is receiving it.

From a 2008 W3V list serv posting:

"Hello Everyone:

I joined this listserve a few days ago though I live in Friendship
Heights but I have some experience fighting with neighbors about
development further up the corridor.

In April of 2007 I testified on behalf of Ward 3 Vision in favor of
the Akridge project at 5220 Wisconsin Avenue.

So I am posting to offer the option of Ward 3 Vision testifying on
behalf of this project as well and I also think it is a good idea
that you create a local group to seek party status at the PUD hearing.

The only real concern I would have about Ward 3 Vision testifying is
that if everyone decides they would support and want that is that we
would need to find someone who lives close by to actually testify....most of our
activist members live in Friendship Heights."

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 Vision was exposed some years ago as an "astroturf" -- i.e, faux grass roots - organization that coordinates with large developers and real estate developers. When a major development project was proposed in Upper NW, a Ward 3 Vision leader wrote on what he thought was a private bulletin board that a local-seeming front group be formed to suggest public support for the project. He said that Ward 3 Vision was too controversial to be seen in the lead, but he offered behind the scenes help, writing that Ward 3 Vision had lots of experience in fighting against neighbors. Oops!

That was a story fraught with inaccuracies.

It is a 100% all volunteer group. There is no money involved with it whatsoever and the supporters chip in to put on events and what not.

Please provide proof of what big money is supporting the organization and who is receiving it.

Wow.. Can you post that as it seems memories are short. Interesting.

Ward 3 Vision was exposed some years ago as an "astroturf" -- i.e, faux grass roots - organization that coordinates with large developers and real estate developers. When a major development project was proposed in Upper NW, a Ward 3 Vision leader wrote on what he thought was a private bulletin board that a local-seeming front group be formed to suggest public support for the project. He said that Ward 3 Vision was too controversial to be seen in the lead, but he offered behind the scenes help, writing that Ward 3 Vision had lots of experience in fighting against neighbors. Oops!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments submitted by Ward 3 Vision for inclusion in DC's comprehensive plan do seem like a troll parody: encourage denser taller vibrant upscale mixed use development all over Ward 3.

Sounds great. I am going to support those comments.

Until today I didn't know that there are actually two groups advocating more density along Wisconsin Avenue - I saw a post about Revive 3E on the Tenley listserve this afternoon:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1675092059446476/about/

And their website is terrible but Ward 3 Vision appears to have been around for years and is very active on Twitter:

https://ward3vision.org/

https://twitter.com/Ward3Vision

So thanks to the pro flower pot crowd I'm now getting linked up to some folks who are a bit more forward thinking than you are!

Not sure about "Revive" but Ward 3 Vision has been funded by large developers since its inception. Greater Greater Washington is also funded by development companies. This is all part of a strategy to weaken zoning laws and increase profits, particularly in certain neighborhoods. The latest proposal sponsored by Ward 3 Vision is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to address what they cagily call the "missing middle." It would effectively upzone single family housing areas for several blocks in from the major arterials, to permit construction of more commercial, 3-4 story condo buildings and triplexes.

This is actually 100% false. It is a 100% volunteer organization.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments submitted by Ward 3 Vision for inclusion in DC's comprehensive plan do seem like a troll parody: encourage denser taller vibrant upscale mixed use development all over Ward 3.

Sounds great. I am going to support those comments.

Until today I didn't know that there are actually two groups advocating more density along Wisconsin Avenue - I saw a post about Revive 3E on the Tenley listserve this afternoon:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1675092059446476/about/

And their website is terrible but Ward 3 Vision appears to have been around for years and is very active on Twitter:

https://ward3vision.org/

https://twitter.com/Ward3Vision

So thanks to the pro flower pot crowd I'm now getting linked up to some folks who are a bit more forward thinking than you are!

Not sure about "Revive" but Ward 3 Vision has been funded by large developers since its inception. Greater Greater Washington is also funded by development companies. This is all part of a strategy to weaken zoning laws and increase profits, particularly in certain neighborhoods. The latest proposal sponsored by Ward 3 Vision is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to address what they cagily call the "missing middle." It would effectively upzone single family housing areas for several blocks in from the major arterials, to permit construction of more commercial, 3-4 story condo buildings and triplexes.

Both of the things you state are categorically and provably untrue.

Ward 3 Vision has never been funded by developers.

And none of the proposed amendments from Ward 3 Vision to the Comp Plan (or anyone else for that matter) propose upzoning any single family housing.

All of the comments are here:

https://plandc.dc.gov/

Under the Proposed Amendments to the Text of the Comprehensive Plan During Open Call link and are easily searchable - please cite a single instance where someone proposed upzoning single family housing areas?

I understand you are scared of change but that doesn't excuse ignorance or lying, whichever of the two you are guilty of.

#streetworkskickbacks

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments submitted by Ward 3 Vision for inclusion in DC's comprehensive plan do seem like a troll parody: encourage denser taller vibrant upscale mixed use development all over Ward 3.

Sounds great. I am going to support those comments.

Until today I didn't know that there are actually two groups advocating more density along Wisconsin Avenue - I saw a post about Revive 3E on the Tenley listserve this afternoon:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1675092059446476/about/

And their website is terrible but Ward 3 Vision appears to have been around for years and is very active on Twitter:

https://ward3vision.org/

https://twitter.com/Ward3Vision

So thanks to the pro flower pot crowd I'm now getting linked up to some folks who are a bit more forward thinking than you are!

Not sure about "Revive" but Ward 3 Vision has been funded by large developers since its inception. Greater Greater Washington is also funded by development companies. This is all part of a strategy to weaken zoning laws and increase profits, particularly in certain neighborhoods. The latest proposal sponsored by Ward 3 Vision is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to address what they cagily call the "missing middle." It would effectively upzone single family housing areas for several blocks in from the major arterials, to permit construction of more commercial, 3-4 story condo buildings and triplexes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a huge market overlap. Cathedral commons is not just a lunch place. Many of these students may have huge gaps in the afternoon as well. We're you ever in college? You're aware that you can set a schedule that's not necessarily 9-5? I'm not sure why it's so important to you to prove that Tenleytown and cc are on two entirely different planets. To those of us in the neighborhood it's simply which way do you want to walk? The thing limiting Tenleytown to fast express is the unheard of rents that landlords like any are charging. Remember armands was there for years until the uptick... Or maybe you aren't from the neighborhood for long and don't remember. - happy walker

Armand's owned that building, which made staying there til Jimmy passed away tenable, or maybe you have lived in the neighborhood a long time but didn't bother to know that.

Tenleytown has the quick food bonanza because of the concentration of high school, college and law students, as well as heavy commuter foot traffic. It's pretty simple.

And the high rents. Do you think 40,000$ for the lakefire grill space is affordable to other models of food service? Yes, pretty simple. Look, I believe that University/"town" relationships are important and that to a degree the university should be invested in things like keeping landmark institutions in the neighborhood. You don't. You're all Ayn Rand survival of the fittest. That's fine. My respect for AU has diminished as well as my willingness to cooperate with low scrutiny on future projects of theirs. Yours hasn't. OK. I'm guessing AU knew Johnsons was valued or they wouldn't have spent "two years' trying to keep them and published their letter. They made a choice and so have I.

Again you have no idea what rents people are paying or what the market can bear but the market does have a way of sorting itself out and there is nothing Randian about that.

But I appreciate the hyperbole - now Johnson's is a landmark institution!

I was told the rent for that corner restaurant space was 40,000 monthly. The source was public information shared at some meeting or forum, but can't remember which. If you have other information please share. Maybe I added or dropped a zero which would make a vast difference, but 40,000 is the figure I remember as it was jaw dropping. I believe the landlord for that complex is AU. Do you have actual facts to share?

Of course it is. That's a given in this discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a huge market overlap. Cathedral commons is not just a lunch place. Many of these students may have huge gaps in the afternoon as well. We're you ever in college? You're aware that you can set a schedule that's not necessarily 9-5? I'm not sure why it's so important to you to prove that Tenleytown and cc are on two entirely different planets. To those of us in the neighborhood it's simply which way do you want to walk? The thing limiting Tenleytown to fast express is the unheard of rents that landlords like any are charging. Remember armands was there for years until the uptick... Or maybe you aren't from the neighborhood for long and don't remember. - happy walker

Armand's owned that building, which made staying there til Jimmy passed away tenable, or maybe you have lived in the neighborhood a long time but didn't bother to know that.

Tenleytown has the quick food bonanza because of the concentration of high school, college and law students, as well as heavy commuter foot traffic. It's pretty simple.

And the high rents. Do you think 40,000$ for the lakefire grill space is affordable to other models of food service? Yes, pretty simple. Look, I believe that University/"town" relationships are important and that to a degree the university should be invested in things like keeping landmark institutions in the neighborhood. You don't. You're all Ayn Rand survival of the fittest. That's fine. My respect for AU has diminished as well as my willingness to cooperate with low scrutiny on future projects of theirs. Yours hasn't. OK. I'm guessing AU knew Johnsons was valued or they wouldn't have spent "two years' trying to keep them and published their letter. They made a choice and so have I.

Again you have no idea what rents people are paying or what the market can bear but the market does have a way of sorting itself out and there is nothing Randian about that.

But I appreciate the hyperbole - now Johnson's is a landmark institution!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comments submitted by Ward 3 Vision for inclusion in DC's comprehensive plan do seem like a troll parody: encourage denser taller vibrant upscale mixed use development all over Ward 3.

Sounds great. I am going to support those comments.

Until today I didn't know that there are actually two groups advocating more density along Wisconsin Avenue - I saw a post about Revive 3E on the Tenley listserve this afternoon:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1675092059446476/about/

And their website is terrible but Ward 3 Vision appears to have been around for years and is very active on Twitter:

https://ward3vision.org/

https://twitter.com/Ward3Vision

So thanks to the pro flower pot crowd I'm now getting linked up to some folks who are a bit more forward thinking than you are!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a huge market overlap. Cathedral commons is not just a lunch place. Many of these students may have huge gaps in the afternoon as well. We're you ever in college? You're aware that you can set a schedule that's not necessarily 9-5? I'm not sure why it's so important to you to prove that Tenleytown and cc are on two entirely different planets. To those of us in the neighborhood it's simply which way do you want to walk? The thing limiting Tenleytown to fast express is the unheard of rents that landlords like any are charging. Remember armands was there for years until the uptick... Or maybe you aren't from the neighborhood for long and don't remember. - happy walker

Armand's owned that building, which made staying there til Jimmy passed away tenable, or maybe you have lived in the neighborhood a long time but didn't bother to know that.

Tenleytown has the quick food bonanza because of the concentration of high school, college and law students, as well as heavy commuter foot traffic. It's pretty simple.

And the high rents. Do you think 40,000$ for the lakefire grill space is affordable to other models of food service? Yes, pretty simple. Look, I believe that University/"town" relationships are important and that to a degree the university should be invested in things like keeping landmark institutions in the neighborhood. You don't. You're all Ayn Rand survival of the fittest. That's fine. My respect for AU has diminished as well as my willingness to cooperate with low scrutiny on future projects of theirs. Yours hasn't. OK. I'm guessing AU knew Johnsons was valued or they wouldn't have spent "two years' trying to keep them and published their letter. They made a choice and so have I.

By the way, you should apply for neighborhood historian. Maybe add a trail marker for Armands/Jimmy. You're very up on your Tenleylore. Thumbs up!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There is a huge market overlap. Cathedral commons is not just a lunch place. Many of these students may have huge gaps in the afternoon as well. We're you ever in college? You're aware that you can set a schedule that's not necessarily 9-5? I'm not sure why it's so important to you to prove that Tenleytown and cc are on two entirely different planets. To those of us in the neighborhood it's simply which way do you want to walk? The thing limiting Tenleytown to fast express is the unheard of rents that landlords like any are charging. Remember armands was there for years until the uptick... Or maybe you aren't from the neighborhood for long and don't remember. - happy walker

Armand's owned that building, which made staying there til Jimmy passed away tenable, or maybe you have lived in the neighborhood a long time but didn't bother to know that.

Tenleytown has the quick food bonanza because of the concentration of high school, college and law students, as well as heavy commuter foot traffic. It's pretty simple.

And the high rents. Do you think 40,000$ for the lakefire grill space is affordable to other models of food service? Yes, pretty simple. Look, I believe that University/"town" relationships are important and that to a degree the university should be invested in things like keeping landmark institutions in the neighborhood. You don't. You're all Ayn Rand survival of the fittest. That's fine. My respect for AU has diminished as well as my willingness to cooperate with low scrutiny on future projects of theirs. Yours hasn't. OK. I'm guessing AU knew Johnsons was valued or they wouldn't have spent "two years' trying to keep them and published their letter. They made a choice and so have I.