The DMV needs a YIMBY revolution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unironically.
Most of you will hate this but I don’t care. We all need to suck it up and move into the 21st century, 25 years too late.

No more tweaking around the edges with low-level zoning reform or a few more metro stops or buses here and there. We need a broad scale systematic urban planning overhaul that completely eliminates single family zoning anywhere inside the Beltway.

Single family zoning is simply unsustainable. We can’t grow our economy if we don’t have new residents and we can’t have new residents if we don’t have homes. And if we don’t have more homes near better, reliable transit, then everyone will be more miserable stuck in traffic and less productive at work and less economically competitive. We need to completely eliminate suburban sprawl. The 1950s planned communities need to stay in the past. In a perfect world we’d move everyone closer in to promote re-wilding of our exurbs.

Nobody should be living in a single family suburban home and drive an SUV. It should be either urban, dense multi family dwelling walkable 15-minute neighborhoods, or rural homesteads, preferably using their land for organic family farming and solar fields and green spaces.

If it weren’t for American “but muh freedumb!” selfish ideology, I guarantee we would all have a much higher quality of life with less traffic, less stress, stronger communities, less obesity, and a better economy.

Bring on the YIMBY revolution.

I don’t care either. Our neighborhood in DC is covenanted (no racial clauses). Can’t wait, my property value will just keep climbing.

You are so smug, but what you don't realize is these regulations are by right and will override your neighborhood's regulations. If not now, then soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

[Anonymous]

Change in land use is natural over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry you can't afford to live near us, but we like it that way.

There are more of us than you and we can vote. You can’t stop it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry you can't afford to live near us, but we like it that way.

There are more of us than you and we can vote. You can’t stop it.

You won't vote me off the land I own. I'm feeling magnanimous and am happy to offer you a one way bus ticket to Baltimore and all of its affordable housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

There are densely-populated urban areas in places that "work" according to the PP, and there are also densely-populated urban areas in places that don't. Cities are not a newfangled trend invented by the YIMBYs, or a luxury good.

And, of course, suburbs require services just as much as cities do, plus suburbs make it much more inefficient - and thus expensive - to deliver those services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry you can't afford to live near us, but we like it that way.

There are more of us than you and we can vote. You can’t stop it.

You won't vote me off the land I own. I'm feeling magnanimous and am happy to offer you a one way bus ticket to Baltimore and all of its affordable housing.

Correct (assuming no eminent domain). This is not about the land you own. It's about the land you don't own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

There are densely-populated urban areas in places that "work" according to the PP, and there are also densely-populated urban areas in places that don't. Cities are not a newfangled trend invented by the YIMBYs, or a luxury good.

And, of course, suburbs require services just as much as cities do, plus suburbs make it much more inefficient - and thus expensive - to deliver those services.

You’d think this would be true when you look at a map and see how spread out suburbs are but cities spend much more per capita than neighboring suburbs. There seems to be no economy of scale and no fiscal benefit from compactness. Savings in not having to build bigger road networks are more than offset in other areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry you can't afford to live near us, but we like it that way.

There are more of us than you and we can vote. You can’t stop it.

You won't vote me off the land I own. I'm feeling magnanimous and am happy to offer you a one way bus ticket to Baltimore and all of its affordable housing.

Correct (assuming no eminent domain). This is not about the land you own. It's about the land you don't own.

Eminent domain has been popping up in YIMBY literature more lately as a solution to land uses that YIMBYs don’t like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

There are densely-populated urban areas in places that "work" according to the PP, and there are also densely-populated urban areas in places that don't. Cities are not a newfangled trend invented by the YIMBYs, or a luxury good.

And, of course, suburbs require services just as much as cities do, plus suburbs make it much more inefficient - and thus expensive - to deliver those services.

You’d think this would be true when you look at a map and see how spread out suburbs are but cities spend much more per capita than neighboring suburbs. There seems to be no economy of scale and no fiscal benefit from compactness. Savings in not having to build bigger road networks are more than offset in other areas.

You'd think this would be true, and it actually is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry you can't afford to live near us, but we like it that way.

There are more of us than you and we can vote. You can’t stop it.

You won't vote me off the land I own. I'm feeling magnanimous and am happy to offer you a one way bus ticket to Baltimore and all of its affordable housing.

Correct (assuming no eminent domain). This is not about the land you own. It's about the land you don't own.

Eminent domain has been popping up in YIMBY literature more lately as a solution to land uses that YIMBYs don’t like.

"YIMBY literature"? What kind of literature is YIMBY literature? Is that a genre, like historical fiction or romance? I'm always looking for good novels to add to my reading list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

There are densely-populated urban areas in places that "work" according to the PP, and there are also densely-populated urban areas in places that don't. Cities are not a newfangled trend invented by the YIMBYs, or a luxury good.

And, of course, suburbs require services just as much as cities do, plus suburbs make it much more inefficient - and thus expensive - to deliver those services.

You’d think this would be true when you look at a map and see how spread out suburbs are but cities spend much more per capita than neighboring suburbs. There seems to be no economy of scale and no fiscal benefit from compactness. Savings in not having to build bigger road networks are more than offset in other areas.

You'd think this would be true, and it actually is true.

You’re as confident as you are uninformed.

https://better-cities.org/community-growth-housing/contra-strong-towns/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Moved to the burbs for more space.

If you don't like it, go move to DC. Keep your urbanist mindset to yourself in the cities.

Many people do not want to live like animals in small cages jam packed into 600 sqft of living space in buildings infested with rodents, bed bugs, flees, and roaches that inevitably come with highly dense housing. You people won't be happy until we live like rats in cage like they do in Hong Kong. Even with all of that massive density in areas like Hing Kong, housing is still unaffordable. Upzoning and density is not the panacea it is cracked up to be.

I live in Hong Kong. I have previously lived in DC, northern VA, and Europe.

One of the things the YIMBY people in the US don’t get is that there are hugely different approaches to infrastructure investment, law enforcement, and general societal expectations.

Hong Kong is a ridiculously low crime city. The subway is clean, modern, and reliable. People here would never tolerate fare jumping, petty crime, or routinely late trains.

If you want people to embrace density, you need to first improve services and law enforcement.

There are cities in plenty of places in the world that are not surveilled by Electronic Big Brother.

NP. Think you missed the point that density works in these places because they fund the services necessary to support it. In the US it’s just density, density, density, don’t worry we’ll figure out the rest later (but never do).

There are densely-populated urban areas in places that "work" according to the PP, and there are also densely-populated urban areas in places that don't. Cities are not a newfangled trend invented by the YIMBYs, or a luxury good.

And, of course, suburbs require services just as much as cities do, plus suburbs make it much more inefficient - and thus expensive - to deliver those services.

You’d think this would be true when you look at a map and see how spread out suburbs are but cities spend much more per capita than neighboring suburbs. There seems to be no economy of scale and no fiscal benefit from compactness. Savings in not having to build bigger road networks are more than offset in other areas.

You'd think this would be true, and it actually is true.

You’re as confident as you are uninformed.

https://better-cities.org/community-growth-housing/contra-strong-towns/

That's your source? Okey dokey.