Wisconsin Ave Development Project

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

Most of us moved here when FH was closer to Ballston or Pike…meaning it had dozens of stores and other services.

Ballston doesn’t have better schools, not by a long shot…it’s not McLean. DC actually has a lower all-in tax rate compared to MoCo when you look at income, property and sales tax.

We are just trying to get back to 2005 at a minimum here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But FH will be developed for better or worse. Would you prefer townhomes or high rises? I say this as someone who generally opposes development, but I don't see the point of lots of one bedroom condos that will ultimately be filled with voucher holders.

Townhouses preferred.

Townhomes make a lot more sense. There needs to be a mix of housing options and that is what is missing.

Townhomes are perfect for this area. You can add housing without disrupting the character too much. Way better than condos/apartments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have young adult children, and they are definitely not seeking 700 square foot 1 1/2 bedroom condos. They want three bedroom townhouses under 2000 square feet for under a million. Do such homes exist? All the new townhouses I see are $2 million and 3000 square feet.

Move to Rockville? You can’t afford NWDC if that’s the case. Idk why people think the world should cater to their budget?

They can’t afford NWDC due to zoning restrictions ….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But FH will be developed for better or worse. Would you prefer townhomes or high rises? I say this as someone who generally opposes development, but I don't see the point of lots of one bedroom condos that will ultimately be filled with voucher holders.

Townhouses preferred.

Townhomes make a lot more sense. There needs to be a mix of housing options and that is what is missing.

Townhomes are perfect for this area. You can add housing without disrupting the character too much. Way better than condos/apartments.

And by "disrupting the character", you mean "building apartment buildings"?

[Anonymous]

I don't have a fundamental issue with apartment buildings, if we needed them, but vacancy rates are high and people are not moving to DC. Who is going to live in these apartments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a fundamental issue with apartment buildings, if we needed them, but vacancy rates are high and people are not moving to DC. Who is going to live in these apartments?

If there is no demand for them, builders will not build them. Worry averted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

What is "special about the city" in your opinion?

Families live in apartments, too.

They do because there's not any starter home priced options. A $3-4k+ a month 2 bedroom rental apartment is not a substitute for a $500-750k townhouse.

That's the problem with housing right now. There's only two choices - an overpriced rental apartment with waterfall granite countertops or an overpriced detached house with white cabinets.

Rental costs are high, in part, because we've lost the mid-range price points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have young adult children, and they are definitely not seeking 700 square foot 1 1/2 bedroom condos. They want three bedroom townhouses under 2000 square feet for under a million. Do such homes exist? All the new townhouses I see are $2 million and 3000 square feet.

Move to Rockville? You can’t afford NWDC if that’s the case. Idk why people think the world should cater to their budget?

They can’t afford NWDC due to zoning restrictions ….

What’s your point? There are plenty of townhomes in NWDC that are right around the 1M range - Sutton Place, Embassy Park, Westover Place (low to mid 1Ms). Move there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

What is "special about the city" in your opinion?

Families live in apartments, too.

Some families live in apartments, but not most. And the apartments they're building in DC are small and expensive. Even if they are lauded as 2 bedroom/2 bath, they are tiny and not conducive to family living. Some of the older apartments are better sized, but those are falling prey to the voucher community. I just think that if a family must choose between a $750k 1000 square foot apartment in DC vs a $750k 2000 square foot house with a yard in Rockville, they will take the latter, especially since the schools are better.

[Anonymous]

The question is whether that missing middle range should be filled with apartments or townhomes. I argue for townhomes because I think that's what's really missing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The question is whether that missing middle range should be filled with apartments or townhomes. I argue for townhomes because I think that's what's really missing.

Or, how about this as an option: both! Apartments AND attached houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

What is "special about the city" in your opinion?

Families live in apartments, too.

Some families live in apartments, but not most. And the apartments they're building in DC are small and expensive. Even if they are lauded as 2 bedroom/2 bath, they are tiny and not conducive to family living. Some of the older apartments are better sized, but those are falling prey to the voucher community. I just think that if a family must choose between a $750k 1000 square foot apartment in DC vs a $750k 2000 square foot house with a yard in Rockville, they will take the latter, especially since the schools are better.

I bet, if there were more apartments, then the apartments would cost less to rent or buy. Because yes, $750,000 is eye-poppingly unaffordable for most people, whether it's for an apartment in DC or a house in Rockville. Speaking of which, where in Rockville can you buy a $750,000 2,000 square foot house with a yard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

What is "special about the city" in your opinion?

Families live in apartments, too.

They do because there's not any starter home priced options. A $3-4k+ a month 2 bedroom rental apartment is not a substitute for a $500-750k townhouse.

That's the problem with housing right now. There's only two choices - an overpriced rental apartment with waterfall granite countertops or an overpriced detached house with white cabinets.

Rental costs are high, in part, because we've lost the mid-range price points.

News flash: a "starter home" in DC is now a condo. It's not a rowhouse. Please come back from 2005.

[Anonymous]

You can get a townhouse in Rockville for $750k. Also, why do we think DC is going to have this influx of people to fill all these new condos? I've lived here for 30 years, and the population has gone up and down a little, but not much. Right now, we 're in a downturn because of remote work, crime, and school quality. Why do we assume 100,000 new people are going to move to DC? I just don't see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Il’m not the previous poster, but please don’t make this into Ballston or Pike and Rose. Why would people live in DH if it just mimics those other places and they have lower taxes and better schools. Let’s rebuild Fh in a way that retains what’s special about the city. And yes, I’d live to see townhomes rather than tiny condos/apartments. We need places for families.

What is "special about the city" in your opinion?

Families live in apartments, too.

They do because there's not any starter home priced options. A $3-4k+ a month 2 bedroom rental apartment is not a substitute for a $500-750k townhouse.

That's the problem with housing right now. There's only two choices - an overpriced rental apartment with waterfall granite countertops or an overpriced detached house with white cabinets.

Rental costs are high, in part, because we've lost the mid-range price points.

News flash: a "starter home" in DC is now a condo. It's not a rowhouse. Please come back from 2005.

That's because there aren't many rowhouses. The big difference is rent versus ownership. Creating a bifurcated society is really bad over the long term.