Walkability, house size, etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ohhh... I'm totally on board with your urbanist agenda, PP, but you do know that there certainly are big shopping malls and Fairfax-style dullsville suburban developments all over Europe, right? Lots of Europeans live exactly the way you say they don't and are too stupid to miss their walkable city centers. The idiocy of rural and almost-rural life has claimed plenty of victims on both sides of the pond.

But "we don't care if it's walkable" PPs are irresponsible because we, as a society, pay a heavy political and environmental price for the subsidizing of the car culture and the fueling of their supersized homes and lifestyles.

What we don't care for is dimwits like you with a mind-boggling mix of idiocy and arrogance, presuming they can tell others how to live and judge them for following a model other than your preferred one. Who are you to decide what the right size is for my home and lifestyle?

Too bad you weren't born in the USSR, you'd fit right in.

And who are you to demand that those of us living more responsibly continue to subsidize the resources you so thoughtlessly consume? Haven't enough Real 'Merkuns died so you can continue to count on cheap gas? Haven't enough scary-assed regimes been fueled by oil money? Hasn't enough environmental damage happened to our own country as the result of our efforts to "unlock" our own fossil fuel reserves?

What about the depletion of farmland as it gets converted to "subdivisions"?

And yes, the obesity epidemic, for which car culture is at least in large part to blame.

You say all this is your business alone, but we all share finite natural resources and communal economic resources. Face it, your lifestyle choices are no longer so dominant in this region that you can continue to live as you do without coming under some criticism. And certainly, the faster-rising value of District and sorta close housing stock confirms that perceptions of the desirability of a car-centric lifestyle are changing.

Dude, when you describe the "District" as not-car-centric, you come across as myopic as little girls who wax poetic about "Europe." You don't actually mean the District of Columbia, because most of DC - outside of a handful of yuppy places like Dupont and Cleveland Park - are most assuredly NOT dependent on public transit. This applies across the economic spectrum. The rich kids of Kent and Spring Valley will have to schlep to a coffee shop or a restaurant for as as many hours as impoverished kids of Southeast to the library or a grocery store. Wake up. The parts of DC served by public transit make up only a small part of the ENTIRE DC. Oh, you may not have to drive as long as kids in Ashburn. But rest assured, your bumcheeks will know the caress of the carseat as certain as sunrise. Yes, you can live a car-free life in the District - in a small, small handful of District enclaves.

But no argument from me on the faster rising values in DC. I own a couple of rentals there, and I am pleased people like you pay my mortgage so I don't have to.

Plenty of DCUMs live in DC's urban neighborhoods. You shouldn't assume we're all UpperNWesties, and by the way, not UpperNwestie doesn't automatically mean we've chosen larger, cheaper houses in Petworth over the walking neighborhoods you describe as "Yuppie". (That's an '80s-referencing term if ever there was one!)

Sure, your urban properties were great investments. But how do you not see the connection between their popularity and the increasing popularity of urban living?

" increasing popularity of urban living?"

please only on dcum would you want to shove your family in a row house the width of half my 3 car garage in mclean

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Plenty of DCUMs live in DC's urban neighborhoods. You shouldn't assume we're all UpperNWesties, and by the way, not UpperNwestie doesn't automatically mean we've chosen larger, cheaper houses in Petworth over the walking neighborhoods you describe as "Yuppie". (That's an '80s-referencing term if ever there was one!)

Sure, your urban properties were great investments. But how do you not see the connection between their popularity and the increasing popularity of urban living?

I don't know where you all live. That's not my concern. My point - which I am happy to repeat - is that the parts of DC served by public transit and therefore at least somewhat suited for the car-free lifestyle you covet constitute a tiny minority of that thing called District of Columbia. Most of DC residents cannot walk to their school (or want to), library, coffee shop or grocery store. It is therefore inaccurate to state that living in the District makes you closer to being car-free.

I never argued that urban living is not popular. Only that it is not a model for everyone everywhere. My rental properties are taken by young, single, not-rich office workers. When they move on, others will come to take their place and they will be carbon copies of previous tenants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in Europe and walking was important to me, I didn't know about walk score but just looked ours up - it's 96.

I live in a 3 bedroom condo downtown, but I probably don't need/want as much stuff as most Americans seem to. You guys seem to always want more stuff.

We rarely drive and walk everywhere. Which is probably why we aren't as fat as most of you.

I want you to take your smug ass outta here and STFU. Is that too mich "stuff" to want?

Grumpy because of your big butt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Raise your hand if you actually *like Tysons*... anyone?

Is there anyone who thinks that Tysons is a fun place to live? Not a practical place to live, but a *nice* place to live?

If so, seriously?

I think it's nice and convenient to everything and is going to be awesome with the new silver line metro.

+1 hand raised

There are some amazing residential neighborhoods around Tysons and with the long term plan to make it more walkable it can only get better.

[Anonymous]

And who are you to demand that those of us living more responsibly continue to subsidize the resources you so thoughtlessly consume? Haven't enough Real 'Merkuns died so you can continue to count on cheap gas? Haven't enough scary-assed regimes been fueled by oil money? Hasn't enough environmental damage happened to our own country as the result of our efforts to "unlock" our own fossil fuel reserves?

What about the depletion of farmland as it gets converted to "subdivisions"?

And yes, the obesity epidemic, for which car culture is at least in large part to blame.

You say all this is your business alone, but we all share finite natural resources and communal economic resources. Face it, your lifestyle choices are no longer so dominant in this region that you can continue to live as you do without coming under some criticism. And certainly, the faster-rising value of District and sorta close housing stock confirms that perceptions of the desirability of a car-centric lifestyle are changing.

PP you make some good points here. I don't want to tell other people how to live, but I do worry about what kind of world our kids will inherit due to our shortsightedness and wastefulness. I worry that there will be more dangerous weather events, and that drought and hotter temps will lead to food and water stress and political instability. I worry about how the U.S. will pay for health care given obesity and diabetes costs increasing and at younger ages.

[Anonymous]

The Mosaic District is really gonna be cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Mosaic District is really gonna be cool.

Pimmit Hills too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And who are you to demand that those of us living more responsibly continue to subsidize the resources you so thoughtlessly consume? Haven't enough Real 'Merkuns died so you can continue to count on cheap gas? Haven't enough scary-assed regimes been fueled by oil money? Hasn't enough environmental damage happened to our own country as the result of our efforts to "unlock" our own fossil fuel reserves?

What about the depletion of farmland as it gets converted to "subdivisions"?

And yes, the obesity epidemic, for which car culture is at least in large part to blame.

You say all this is your business alone, but we all share finite natural resources and communal economic resources. Face it, your lifestyle choices are no longer so dominant in this region that you can continue to live as you do without coming under some criticism. And certainly, the faster-rising value of District and sorta close housing stock confirms that perceptions of the desirability of a car-centric lifestyle are changing.

PP you make some good points here. I don't want to tell other people how to live, but I do worry about what kind of world our kids will inherit due to our shortsightedness and wastefulness. I worry that there will be more dangerous weather events, and that drought and hotter temps will lead to food and water stress and political instability. I worry about how the U.S. will pay for health care given obesity and diabetes costs increasing and at younger ages.

You are so full of crap. The residents of the DC suburbs are among the healthiest people on the planet, and the highest obesity rates locally are in DC.

If you spent one fraction of the time you spent dumping on the suburbs working to improve the health of the inner-city poor of DC, this would be a better region. Bu perhaps you'd just like those people to disappear to Prince George's, out of sight and out of mind, so you can keep spouting the same self-serving garbage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Plenty of DCUMs live in DC's urban neighborhoods. You shouldn't assume we're all UpperNWesties, and by the way, not UpperNwestie doesn't automatically mean we've chosen larger, cheaper houses in Petworth over the walking neighborhoods you describe as "Yuppie". (That's an '80s-referencing term if ever there was one!)

Sure, your urban properties were great investments. But how do you not see the connection between their popularity and the increasing popularity of urban living?

I don't know where you all live. That's not my concern. My point - which I am happy to repeat - is that the parts of DC served by public transit and therefore at least somewhat suited for the car-free lifestyle you covet constitute a tiny minority of that thing called District of Columbia. Most of DC residents cannot walk to their school (or want to), library, coffee shop or grocery store. It is therefore inaccurate to state that living in the District makes you closer to being car-free.

I never argued that urban living is not popular. Only that it is not a model for everyone everywhere. My rental properties are taken by young, single, not-rich office workers. When they move on, others will come to take their place and they will be carbon copies of previous tenants.

My rowhouse in Georgetown is rented by World Bank, IMF, embassy employees and their families (Yes, kids too). I'm guessing the size of your place might serve your demographic.

[Anonymous]

Lots of anger and name-calling on here, but I think the fundamental answer to the OP's question is that some people don't think it's just a "live and let live" issue. They think that other people's decisions to buy larger houses and larger cars and do more driving impact the rest of us negatively by increasing the carbon in the atmosphere and raising global temperatures. There are no laws saying you can't do this in the U.S., but it seems people should be able to voice their opposition to it just as other people voice their opposition to other moral and ethical decisions they disagree with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mosaic District is really gonna be cool.

Pimmit Hills too.

I know these are places that are getting poked-fun of a lot on DCUM lately. However, it seems as though the nastiness here is against anyone who chooses not to live in DC proper. I posted umpteen pages ago, not everyone has the luxury, both in terms of practicality and financially, of living and working and engaging in all of their desired quality of life pursuits within a ten block radius.

If Tysons does become more walkable and the silver line improves things even more, DC-ites will still rip on families who live in that area since they aren't living [i]in DC[i]. Those are the very people who should be cheering on development in Tysons or Shirlington or any place else that provides people with walkable lifestyles, even if they aren't as "cool" as those living in DC proper.

I have a job in the suburbs and like to garden. My house is roughly 2000sf and property is less than 1/10th of an acre. Yet, according to those touting urban living as the most important and only worthwhile type of living, I'm a drain on the world.

[Anonymous]

I just finished a dump in one of my 8 bathrooms, that's american. This was after taking 3 flights of stairs up my open foyer that opened to the 3rd floor foyer so I definitely got some walkability exercise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of anger and name-calling on here, but I think the fundamental answer to the OP's question is that some people don't think it's just a "live and let live" issue. They think that other people's decisions to buy larger houses and larger cars and do more driving impact the rest of us negatively by increasing the carbon in the atmosphere and raising global temperatures. There are no laws saying you can't do this in the U.S., but it seems people should be able to voice their opposition to it just as other people voice their opposition to other moral and ethical decisions they disagree with.

Blather away. We'll enjoy our lives while you live in a shit shack and try and convince yourself you've taken some moral high ground.

[Anonymous]

please only on dcum would you want to shove your family in a row house the width of half my 3 car garage in mclean

Well, not just on DCUM, but in DC proper. Even some who can afford the 3 car garage in Mclean may prefer shoving our family into the 24-foot wide row house in the District. And even 15 foot wide row houses. I work in DC and prefer to have a short commute. Take the bus so I don't need a 3 car garage. Would rather read than battle traffic.

Have never lived in suburbs and probably never will. Don't necessarily think of the inner rings of Bethesda, Silver Spring, Takoma and Arlington as suburbs. There are many appealing walkable neighborhoods in all of them. While I know you think it is crazy the folks shove their families into row houses, I can't fathom why you would want three cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of anger and name-calling on here, but I think the fundamental answer to the OP's question is that some people don't think it's just a "live and let live" issue. They think that other people's decisions to buy larger houses and larger cars and do more driving impact the rest of us negatively by increasing the carbon in the atmosphere and raising global temperatures. There are no laws saying you can't do this in the U.S., but it seems people should be able to voice their opposition to it just as other people voice their opposition to other moral and ethical decisions they disagree with.

Blather away. We'll enjoy our lives while you live in a shit shack and try and convince yourself you've taken some moral high ground.

What is this with the shit shack? I live in one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the district, willing to wager that most, if not all, houses on our block cost more than anyone posting on this thread.