There is no housing crisis in MoCo or most of the DMV for that matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

OP will have that regardless of zoning changes (unless they decide to sell). What OP wants is their neighborhood to stay frozen in amber. Which is pretty entitled, given that OP doesn't own their neighborhood.

What developers want are greater profit margins than currently available, so they push for changes to zoning for them to buy & build in neighborhoods that are not theirs at all. Which is why they seek a YIMBY to shill for them.

On an anonymous forum, though, they don't even need to do that. They can just claim they are the YIMBY in the first place, as nobody could prove them false.

Wait, what? Developers are building on property they don't own? That seems like a problem. You definitely should have to own the property in order to be the owner of that property.

Not sure if you are being intentionally daft to distract, or if you are just confused.

No matter. Developers would look for this zoning change first, then buy & build, as stated. They typically don't deploy the capital for a purchase until they are relatively certain of their return on investment.

Ok? And?

Now I'm sure you're being intentionally daft and didn't have a point to make while ignoring counters to the idea that folks should have no say in their own communities while developers should.

You have a say, by voting.

Developers who buy property in your community are property owners just like you (presumably) and your neighbors (presumably) are.

Faulty reasoning, there. Junior and His Orangeness were voted in. Does that mean everything they did was just and that others shouldn't have resisted?

You continue to ignore that developers typically don't buy on spec, but advocate for the profit-expanding zoning and then buy. They typically don't live in the neighborhoods they affect, or even similar neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that OP is defining entitlement as wanting to be able to afford housing on your salary.

I think it's entitled for people who already own houses to think they can dictate what happens to all the land around them, in order to ensure they can one day sell their home for 3-4x what they paid for it.

But I guess we just get to define words however we want now.

Nice try. Let’s help you out here. Entitlement happens when your ABC salary affords you ABC housing — which definitely exists already in your metro area — but YOU want XYZ type housing in the same general zip codes because it’s nicer than the ABC housing you are able to afford with your salary and life choices.

Rather than accept your readily available ABC housing, you demand that others (not you) change so you can obtain your nicer XYZ housing.


That is entitled

You don't understand how any of this works.

What happens us that people have ABC salary and then they get ABC housing. Fine. But they are saving with the intention of buying DEF housing when they start making DEF money. Then they increase to DEF salary but, surprise! DEF housing now costs GHI money. Okay, so they keep saving. Before they are even making GHI money, DEF housing costs JKL money. Once they are finally making GHI money, rates have gone up and now DEF housing is still priced at JKL money, but the real cost is MNO money because they are paying 7% interest on a home that has appreciated 80% of its value in the last 10 years.

And the seller of this house (that's you) bought or refinanced at 2%, and they'll be damned if they are going to accept DEF or even GHI money for this house when their mortgage is so cheap. They'll sit in it or rent it out until they can get what they think it's worth, even though the percent of prospective buyers who can afford what they are offering is minuscule. This reluctance to sell at a price the market can afford creates false scarcity in the market, which drives up prices more.

And now you want to tell the people who own the house down the block that they MAY NOT sell their house to a developer who might turn it into a four-plex where each of the units will sell for DEF money. Because you benefit from the false scarcity if housing in the area. Your housing is cheap, thanks to record low rates that current buyers missed out on, and if you can keep the cost of housing going up, it's all profit to you. So you want to prevent the seller down the street from selling their home for a market-set price, to a developer who will hire a bunch of local people to renovate the property (creating numerous jobs), and then sell the resulting property for a profit to people who would otherwise not be able to buy in your neighborhood (I creasing property tax revenues, filling jobs in the area, getting more kids into area schools, spending more money at area businesses). You want to handicap the seller, the developer, and multiple home buyers, all so you can eventually sell the house you bought for ABC money for an XYZ price.

THAT is entitlement. Keep your house, sell your house, whatever. But you don't get to tell everyone else what to do just to ensure you maximize the profit you can make on your home for doing absolutely nothing.

Stupid logic. Using your asinine reasoning a home owner should be able to sell their land to chemical manufacturer who emits lots of pollution in urban areas where lots of people reside. Sure, let's keep going down your dumb rabbit hole.

Leftists can't stand people are different and achieved different outcomes. They force social engineering by destroying everything that is good when select people have built better lives for themselves than others have done. Sure, we will all have affordable housing when everything is a derelict dump and we have duplexes and triplexes with 25 cars to a property parking all over the lawns and the roads dumping trash everywhere. I'm so glad we are in a road to abysmal mediocrity. Just admit, your vision will end up turning everything into craptastic soviet style blocs where we can all live in mediocrity.

You're comparing a duplex to a chemical factory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

OP will have that regardless of zoning changes (unless they decide to sell). What OP wants is their neighborhood to stay frozen in amber. Which is pretty entitled, given that OP doesn't own their neighborhood.

What developers want are greater profit margins than currently available, so they push for changes to zoning for them to buy & build in neighborhoods that are not theirs at all. Which is why they seek a YIMBY to shill for them.

On an anonymous forum, though, they don't even need to do that. They can just claim they are the YIMBY in the first place, as nobody could prove them false.

Wait, what? Developers are building on property they don't own? That seems like a problem. You definitely should have to own the property in order to be the owner of that property.

Not sure if you are being intentionally daft to distract, or if you are just confused.

No matter. Developers would look for this zoning change first, then buy & build, as stated. They typically don't deploy the capital for a purchase until they are relatively certain of their return on investment.

Ok? And?

Now I'm sure you're being intentionally daft and didn't have a point to make while ignoring counters to the idea that folks should have no say in their own communities while developers should.

You have a say, by voting.

Developers who buy property in your community are property owners just like you (presumably) and your neighbors (presumably) are.

Faulty reasoning, there. Junior and His Orangeness were voted in. Does that mean everything they did was just and that others shouldn't have resisted?

You continue to ignore that developers typically don't buy on spec, but advocate for the profit-expanding zoning and then buy. They typically don't live in the neighborhoods they affect, or even similar neighborhoods.

Junior and His Orangeness do not have authority over zoning in Montgomery County. The Montgomery County Council does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As pp stated, its not just about “burger flippers”. To function, a healthy and effective society needs teachers, firefighters, EMTs, healthcare workers, sanitation workers, etc. These are not high paying jobs. These employees need somewhere to live.

I am a nurse ($128k fwiw). The VAST majority of my fellow nurses live in places like Howard County, Olney, Urbana, Clarksburg, Rockville …. if they’re married with kids and have a 4-bedroom home. The single, no-kids nurses live in DC and Arlington.

I have never once, in 7 years, met another RN in the DMV who just couldn’t afford to live here within 40 minutes of work at a DC/Montgomery County hospital. In fact, we tend to do pretty well, take vacations, have our kids in travel sports (if married), eat out all the time (the single ones).

Maybe the couples living in a 3000 sq ft newer build house in Olney would prefer to live in NWDC. It doesn’t follow that their dreams have been crushed and they’re living in hardship.

I’ve never understood why RNs and similar are always lumped in with minimum wage workers. But honestly, even they can get a couple of roommates and rent in an older building in a first-ring suburb. How I know? My son does exactly this with an intern’s $17/hr wage.

Yes, families can definitely get a couple of other families and illegally rent in a small older "single-family" house outside the Beltway, or illegally double up with another family in a two-bedroom apartment in a rental complex in Gaithersburg. What is this evidence of? It's evidence of a housing shortage. Plus, at least on line, the same posters who oppose pro-housing policies, such as zoning changes, also demand stricter code enforcement against these types of illegal housing arrangements.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/maryland/montgomery-county/12-people-displaced-after-house-fire-in-wheaton-glenmont/

You didn’t reject my actual datapoints offered about “healthcare workers” making $100k +/- somehow finding a safe place to live. Within 40 minutes of their hospital.

Re: the doubling up “families” …. It’s fine if 4 unrelated men rent a 1+ bed w den in gaithersburg. Also fine if person, spouse, unrelated adult does the same.

Is there no room for these ^^^ people’s children in the same apartment? I have a solution!! 1. Don’t have more kids until your financial circumstances change. 2. Move to a different US city with unskilled jobs in an agriculture heavy state where housing is cheaper. 3. Move back to the place you just moved *from*. Ahem

"Don't have had children" is not actually a solution, housing or otherwise.

You didn't offer data points, you offered anecdata, but I don't really care, plus I think it would be good if people could live closer to their work than a 40-minute drive.

And now we know you don’t actually live in the DMV because if you did, you would know what the actual commute times are here. 40 mins door to door is -good- it’s only in urban planning 201 where you get the idea that a <40 minute commute is achievable in a metropolitan area of six or 7 million people. It’s called theoretical for a reason, and I know it’s a fun thesis for you, but it doesn’t work in reality, and never has



The only way to statistically shorten the average commute times in this metropolitan area would be to build Manhattan skyscrapers, which I suspect you also learned in your urban planning undergrad class and in your current internship. And even then, you wouldn’t get it much under 40 if you look at the median, not mean, commute times for Manhattan and Tokyo. Which is dense as it gets in the real world and not your internship.

And you’re not accounting, as a young 20 something, for the preference of the actual homeowner. a sizable majority of homeowners and even renters prefer outdoor space of their own. I.e. a yard. To get that in any urban area, the trade-off is commute time.

Building thousands of craptastik skimpy micro Apartments in Navy yard is not going to entice a family of four that wants to put in their own swingset and a fenced yard for their dogs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As pp stated, its not just about “burger flippers”. To function, a healthy and effective society needs teachers, firefighters, EMTs, healthcare workers, sanitation workers, etc. These are not high paying jobs. These employees need somewhere to live.

I am a nurse ($128k fwiw). The VAST majority of my fellow nurses live in places like Howard County, Olney, Urbana, Clarksburg, Rockville …. if they’re married with kids and have a 4-bedroom home. The single, no-kids nurses live in DC and Arlington.

I have never once, in 7 years, met another RN in the DMV who just couldn’t afford to live here within 40 minutes of work at a DC/Montgomery County hospital. In fact, we tend to do pretty well, take vacations, have our kids in travel sports (if married), eat out all the time (the single ones).

Maybe the couples living in a 3000 sq ft newer build house in Olney would prefer to live in NWDC. It doesn’t follow that their dreams have been crushed and they’re living in hardship.

I’ve never understood why RNs and similar are always lumped in with minimum wage workers. But honestly, even they can get a couple of roommates and rent in an older building in a first-ring suburb. How I know? My son does exactly this with an intern’s $17/hr wage.

Yes, families can definitely get a couple of other families and illegally rent in a small older "single-family" house outside the Beltway, or illegally double up with another family in a two-bedroom apartment in a rental complex in Gaithersburg. What is this evidence of? It's evidence of a housing shortage. Plus, at least on line, the same posters who oppose pro-housing policies, such as zoning changes, also demand stricter code enforcement against these types of illegal housing arrangements.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/maryland/montgomery-county/12-people-displaced-after-house-fire-in-wheaton-glenmont/

You didn’t reject my actual datapoints offered about “healthcare workers” making $100k +/- somehow finding a safe place to live. Within 40 minutes of their hospital.

Re: the doubling up “families” …. It’s fine if 4 unrelated men rent a 1+ bed w den in gaithersburg. Also fine if person, spouse, unrelated adult does the same.

Is there no room for these ^^^ people’s children in the same apartment? I have a solution!! 1. Don’t have more kids until your financial circumstances change. 2. Move to a different US city with unskilled jobs in an agriculture heavy state where housing is cheaper. 3. Move back to the place you just moved *from*. Ahem

"Don't have had children" is not actually a solution, housing or otherwise.

You didn't offer data points, you offered anecdata, but I don't really care, plus I think it would be good if people could live closer to their work than a 40-minute drive.

And now we know you don’t actually live in the DMV because if you did, you would know what the actual commute times are here. 40 mins door to door is -good- it’s only in urban planning 201 where you get the idea that a <40 minute commute is achievable in a metropolitan area of six or 7 million people. It’s called theoretical for a reason, and I know it’s a fun thesis for you, but it doesn’t work in reality, and never has

The only way to statistically shorten the average commute times in this metropolitan area would be to build Manhattan skyscrapers, which I suspect you also learned in your urban planning undergrad class and in your current internship. And even then, you wouldn’t get it much under 40 if you look at the median, not mean, commute times for Manhattan and Tokyo. Which is dense as it gets in the real world and not your internship.

And you’re not accounting, as a young 20 something, for the preference of the actual homeowner. a sizable majority of homeowners and even renters prefer outdoor space of their own. I.e. a yard. To get that in any urban area, the trade-off is commute time.

Building thousands of craptastik skimpy micro Apartments in Navy yard is not going to entice a family of four that wants to put in their own swingset and a fenced yard for their dogs.

40 minutes, door-to-door, in a car, is actually not good.

I've lived in Maryland for 30 years, I've been a homeowner for 25, I'm a MCPS parent, I qualify for membership in the AARP, I've never taken an urban planning class - so I don't know who you think you're talking to - and it actually is possible to have large metropolitan areas where people don't have to spend an hour and a half a day driving themselves to work and back in a car.

Also if you are an RN, I hope you don't work at a medical practice where you have contact with the general public, because you seem to have a lot of contempt for a lot of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

OP will have that regardless of zoning changes (unless they decide to sell). What OP wants is their neighborhood to stay frozen in amber. Which is pretty entitled, given that OP doesn't own their neighborhood.

What developers want are greater profit margins than currently available, so they push for changes to zoning for them to buy & build in neighborhoods that are not theirs at all. Which is why they seek a YIMBY to shill for them.

On an anonymous forum, though, they don't even need to do that. They can just claim they are the YIMBY in the first place, as nobody could prove them false.

Wait, what? Developers are building on property they don't own? That seems like a problem. You definitely should have to own the property in order to be the owner of that property.

Not sure if you are being intentionally daft to distract, or if you are just confused.

No matter. Developers would look for this zoning change first, then buy & build, as stated. They typically don't deploy the capital for a purchase until they are relatively certain of their return on investment.

Ok? And?

Now I'm sure you're being intentionally daft and didn't have a point to make while ignoring counters to the idea that folks should have no say in their own communities while developers should.

You have a say, by voting.

Developers who buy property in your community are property owners just like you (presumably) and your neighbors (presumably) are.

Faulty reasoning, there. Junior and His Orangeness were voted in. Does that mean everything they did was just and that others shouldn't have resisted?

You continue to ignore that developers typically don't buy on spec, but advocate for the profit-expanding zoning and then buy. They typically don't live in the neighborhoods they affect, or even similar neighborhoods.

Junior and His Orangeness do not have authority over zoning in Montgomery County. The Montgomery County Council does.

Your point being? (related to the even more generalized "you can have a say, by voting" that had been offered as a panacea?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

Oh sorry I didn’t realize that we had already exhausted the available land for apartments. Or maybe the problem isn’t zoning at all. Maybe the problem is big landlords suppressing supply to make sure prices don’t go down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that OP is defining entitlement as wanting to be able to afford housing on your salary.

I think it's entitled for people who already own houses to think they can dictate what happens to all the land around them, in order to ensure they can one day sell their home for 3-4x what they paid for it.

But I guess we just get to define words however we want now.

Nice try. Let’s help you out here. Entitlement happens when your ABC salary affords you ABC housing — which definitely exists already in your metro area — but YOU want XYZ type housing in the same general zip codes because it’s nicer than the ABC housing you are able to afford with your salary and life choices.

Rather than accept your readily available ABC housing, you demand that others (not you) change so you can obtain your nicer XYZ housing.


That is entitled

You don't understand how any of this works.

What happens us that people have ABC salary and then they get ABC housing. Fine. But they are saving with the intention of buying DEF housing when they start making DEF money. Then they increase to DEF salary but, surprise! DEF housing now costs GHI money. Okay, so they keep saving. Before they are even making GHI money, DEF housing costs JKL money. Once they are finally making GHI money, rates have gone up and now DEF housing is still priced at JKL money, but the real cost is MNO money because they are paying 7% interest on a home that has appreciated 80% of its value in the last 10 years.

And the seller of this house (that's you) bought or refinanced at 2%, and they'll be damned if they are going to accept DEF or even GHI money for this house when their mortgage is so cheap. They'll sit in it or rent it out until they can get what they think it's worth, even though the percent of prospective buyers who can afford what they are offering is minuscule. This reluctance to sell at a price the market can afford creates false scarcity in the market, which drives up prices more.

And now you want to tell the people who own the house down the block that they MAY NOT sell their house to a developer who might turn it into a four-plex where each of the units will sell for DEF money. Because you benefit from the false scarcity if housing in the area. Your housing is cheap, thanks to record low rates that current buyers missed out on, and if you can keep the cost of housing going up, it's all profit to you. So you want to prevent the seller down the street from selling their home for a market-set price, to a developer who will hire a bunch of local people to renovate the property (creating numerous jobs), and then sell the resulting property for a profit to people who would otherwise not be able to buy in your neighborhood (I creasing property tax revenues, filling jobs in the area, getting more kids into area schools, spending more money at area businesses). You want to handicap the seller, the developer, and multiple home buyers, all so you can eventually sell the house you bought for ABC money for an XYZ price.

THAT is entitlement. Keep your house, sell your house, whatever. But you don't get to tell everyone else what to do just to ensure you maximize the profit you can make on your home for doing absolutely nothing.

Stupid logic. Using your asinine reasoning a home owner should be able to sell their land to chemical manufacturer who emits lots of pollution in urban areas where lots of people reside. Sure, let's keep going down your dumb rabbit hole.

Leftists can't stand people are different and achieved different outcomes. They force social engineering by destroying everything that is good when select people have built better lives for themselves than others have done. Sure, we will all have affordable housing when everything is a derelict dump and we have duplexes and triplexes with 25 cars to a property parking all over the lawns and the roads dumping trash everywhere. I'm so glad we are in a road to abysmal mediocrity. Just admit, your vision will end up turning everything into craptastic soviet style blocs where we can all live in mediocrity.

You're comparing a duplex to a chemical factory.

Both generate negative externalities. Granted the scale is different.

[Anonymous]

The worst crisis is in the sales market. The rental market isn’t great either because the county’s housing strategy heavily favors big corporate landlords who already have a large market presence and a lot of power over pricing. It will get worse until we stop listening to the market urbanist types who brought us the housing crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

Oh sorry I didn’t realize that we had already exhausted the available land for apartments. Or maybe the problem isn’t zoning at all. Maybe the problem is big landlords suppressing supply to make sure prices don’t go down.

Look at a zoning map of DC. The majority of land is zoned for SFH, either attached or detached. This means you can’t tear down a house or townhouse and build duplexes or apartments if you wanted . You need to inform yourself on the matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asking people that work in DC to go live in Baltimore is the absolute most NIMBY thing you can say

You already got yours in the DC area and now zoning has to stay frozen in amber so you can have a detached SFH close to metro. Ridiculous.

Oh sorry I didn’t realize that we had already exhausted the available land for apartments. Or maybe the problem isn’t zoning at all. Maybe the problem is big landlords suppressing supply to make sure prices don’t go down.

Look at a zoning map of DC. The majority of land is zoned for SFH, either attached or detached. This means you can’t tear down a house or townhouse and build duplexes or apartments if you wanted . You need to inform yourself on the matter.

Look at the zoning map everywhere else. There’s a lot of spaces zoned for apartments with no apartments on them. There’s a big world outside DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As pp stated, its not just about “burger flippers”. To function, a healthy and effective society needs teachers, firefighters, EMTs, healthcare workers, sanitation workers, etc. These are not high paying jobs. These employees need somewhere to live.

I am a nurse ($128k fwiw). The VAST majority of my fellow nurses live in places like Howard County, Olney, Urbana, Clarksburg, Rockville …. if they’re married with kids and have a 4-bedroom home. The single, no-kids nurses live in DC and Arlington.

I have never once, in 7 years, met another RN in the DMV who just couldn’t afford to live here within 40 minutes of work at a DC/Montgomery County hospital. In fact, we tend to do pretty well, take vacations, have our kids in travel sports (if married), eat out all the time (the single ones).

Maybe the couples living in a 3000 sq ft newer build house in Olney would prefer to live in NWDC. It doesn’t follow that their dreams have been crushed and they’re living in hardship.

I’ve never understood why RNs and similar are always lumped in with minimum wage workers. But honestly, even they can get a couple of roommates and rent in an older building in a first-ring suburb. How I know? My son does exactly this with an intern’s $17/hr wage.

Yes, families can definitely get a couple of other families and illegally rent in a small older "single-family" house outside the Beltway, or illegally double up with another family in a two-bedroom apartment in a rental complex in Gaithersburg. What is this evidence of? It's evidence of a housing shortage. Plus, at least on line, the same posters who oppose pro-housing policies, such as zoning changes, also demand stricter code enforcement against these types of illegal housing arrangements.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/maryland/montgomery-county/12-people-displaced-after-house-fire-in-wheaton-glenmont/

You didn’t reject my actual datapoints offered about “healthcare workers” making $100k +/- somehow finding a safe place to live. Within 40 minutes of their hospital.

Re: the doubling up “families” …. It’s fine if 4 unrelated men rent a 1+ bed w den in gaithersburg. Also fine if person, spouse, unrelated adult does the same.

Is there no room for these ^^^ people’s children in the same apartment? I have a solution!! 1. Don’t have more kids until your financial circumstances change. 2. Move to a different US city with unskilled jobs in an agriculture heavy state where housing is cheaper. 3. Move back to the place you just moved *from*. Ahem

"Don't have had children" is not actually a solution, housing or otherwise.

You didn't offer data points, you offered anecdata, but I don't really care, plus I think it would be good if people could live closer to their work than a 40-minute drive.

And now we know you don’t actually live in the DMV because if you did, you would know what the actual commute times are here. 40 mins door to door is -good- it’s only in urban planning 201 where you get the idea that a <40 minute commute is achievable in a metropolitan area of six or 7 million people. It’s called theoretical for a reason, and I know it’s a fun thesis for you, but it doesn’t work in reality, and never has



The only way to statistically shorten the average commute times in this metropolitan area would be to build Manhattan skyscrapers, which I suspect you also learned in your urban planning undergrad class and in your current internship. And even then, you wouldn’t get it much under 40 if you look at the median, not mean, commute times for Manhattan and Tokyo. Which is dense as it gets in the real world and not your internship.

And you’re not accounting, as a young 20 something, for the preference of the actual homeowner. a sizable majority of homeowners and even renters prefer outdoor space of their own. I.e. a yard. To get that in any urban area, the trade-off is commute time.

Building thousands of craptastik skimpy micro Apartments in Navy yard is not going to entice a family of four that wants to put in their own swingset and a fenced yard for their dogs.

Thank you. This over development needs to stop. I'm looking at you Upton Place pop up hotel.

[Anonymous]

So how do we fight the upzoning? Seems to me residential neighborhoods across the DMV...Arlington, MoCo, DC should lock arms and form a coalition with muscle to match the cunning of the density bros. How do we do this? Pool resources and advocacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how do we fight the upzoning? Seems to me residential neighborhoods across the DMV...Arlington, MoCo, DC should lock arms and form a coalition with muscle to match the cunning of the density bros. How do we do this? Pool resources and advocacy?

Everyone needs to register Democrat and then vote out all of the far leftists and pro developer pols during the primaries. It's already lost when it goes to general elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how do we fight the upzoning? Seems to me residential neighborhoods across the DMV...Arlington, MoCo, DC should lock arms and form a coalition with muscle to match the cunning of the density bros. How do we do this? Pool resources and advocacy?

The best way to fight upzoning in MoCo is to keep the region and the country from growing. If you are ok with population growth, those people will have to go somewhere. We are out of "good" places to put all these extra people, so upzoning close in suburbs of economic hubs is among the "least bad" options.

Also keep in mind that almost all of MoCo used to be agricultural and was upzoned to become suburban as the region grew. As the region grows, more will be upzoned.