I am starting to come to the conclusion that Planning as a whole is a profession that’s as a whole completely out of touch. |
Planning may be a profession that is completely out of touch. I don't know, I am not a planner. I am a homeowner, though, in fact a longtime homeowner, and I know for certain that longtime homeowners who refuse to acknowledge the existence of a housing crisis are completely out of touch. |
“Homeowner” = you own a 1BD condo in downtown Silver Spring. |
No, actually, I have owned a detached single family house in Montgomery County for over two decades. Your response says a lot about your opinions, though. Because a person who owns the one-bedroom condo they live in, whether in downtown Silver Spring or elsewhere, actually is just as much a homeowner as any other homeowner, not more, not less. |
What about the developers who refuse to acknowledge a housing crisis? I’m still seeing an awful lot of requests to delay things because the market can’t absorb the planned units. It seems to me that developers delaying 200+ units has a lot more impact on the housing crisis than a homeowner not acknowledging a housing crisis. |
This is just not a serious question, I"m sorry. |
How so? There’s still a steady line of developers asking planning to extend their site plan validity because they claim the housing market is saturated (or some slight variation thereof). Do you think the developers are lying to planning? And if it’s not true then why does planning find it to be in the public interest to keep approving the extensions? Help me out here. |
When I was a renter I cared about services and infrastructure so I’m not sure why we need to distinguish residents in this way. When I was deciding where to live I also cared about services and infrastructure. I’m not sure how disinvesting in infrastructure benefits current or future residents but it sure does save money for developers so I guess we should roll with it? |
The question is not, do renters care about services and infrastructure? The question is, what are renters' priorities? |
DP. It’s well known that the list of delayed and downsized projects is long. |
The question is, "What are residents' priorities?" So far, we have a reasonable handle on infrastructure and services being important when considering changes to development. |
Well, yes. But all we are hearing about, at least on DCUM, are the priorities of some (not even all) homeowners. And those priorities seem to be: no new housing where I live. |
That's a rather unnuanced and strawman-ish way of characterizing: "I want my community to have good infrastructure and services, and would not want to see additional development in a manner that fails to ensure that these are not degraded." And yet we still seem to have nothing that supports the phantom narrative of this not being the priority from the bulk of area residents, whether homeowners or renters. |
Summary: I am the homeowner of a house, and I prefer not to have multi-unit housing my neighborhood, because I believe multi-unit housing in my neighborhood would degrade my neighborhood. Which is fine, you get to have the preferences you have. Similarly, other people get to have other preferences. I think it's a basic part of adult cognition to recognize that people who are not you might have preferences that are different from yours. |
Multiunit housing is entirely different from removing the development cap because multiunit housing isn’t going to turn our streetscapes into unpleasant canyons. |