The Pandemic Hit Cities Hard And Then There's Washington, DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Work is far from the only reason I live in DC. It's baffling to me that folks are like "well I don't have to work in an office anymore, so I'll go live in Frederick." Like, don't you have friends? A social life?

I love the community I have here and I would not be able to replicate it in Frederick in a million years.

I know it’s a generalization, but I think a lot of the people (myself included) who are moving to the exurbs now that we don’t have to be in a DC office 5 days a week have a community that is largely wrapped up in our kids. That community will be replicated anywhere we move because the kids will go to new schools, we will meet the kids parents, etc. The dramatic difference in housing prospects also can’t be underestimated. The 750k house that we are buying in the exurbs would cost 1.5 million or more here. It’s just people in completely different life phases and/or with different priorities. Some people think walkability is non-negotiable, and I could not care less about it. I couldn’t handle being crammed into a 1500 sq ft house with my 2 kids and DH any longer, some people find that absurd. To each their own. But DC will be back, the interns and new graduates will return to the city (just as I came after college) and help pump up the economy again, and when they are ready to leave the city won’t miss a beat because there will be a new group ready to replace them. If DC wants to hold on to a portion of those people as they get older and have families though, they might want to address some of the quality of life issues that a 22 year old isn’t much concerned with.

Except you are talking about your own reality. The majority of households in this country do NOT have school-aged children. The wacky women of DCUM seem to forget that. And, since what seems like the beginning of time, parents with school-aged children have moved out of the city. You are not a trailblazer of a new trend, and your demographic is not the problem.

Look outside of your bubble for once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moved to the District in 1990 - coincidentally, the same year that GGW bro intern was born in Indiana. My inlaws and husband have lived here since the 60s. You know, the riots and all.

I have a hunch that in the near-term DC will feel like it did during the *late* Barry years, post riot and post intense crack wars … but still suboptimal and looking for revenue. With an overlay of ever-present graft and hesitant developers. I predict DC will again shuffle along for some years, until there is a big political change analogous to Tony Williams ♥️ This would lead business and banks to have the confidence to Do Big Things downtown, a la Abe Pollin ♥️

One thing that is clear is that this will require grown up, boring elected officials who understand big picture financials and aren’t jerked around by the short hairs by the likes of WABA and 4-person homeless nonprofit and donations

GGW bro is insulated from this environment because he never leaves his 4-block area, doesn’t have kids and doesn’t own a home. People like my family are insulated to this decline because we live in an enclave like historic Cleveland Park and can pay our way out of bullshit with private schools, locked garages and beach houses and we can weather the new taxes.

Two kids in a crosswalk on Georgia Ave we're just hit by a car this morning. Have fun ragging in GGW bros and WABA short hairs. But what are you proposing to make this a safer place for people to live?

That is very sad. That is also entirely irrelevant to my point.

Sort of like this is irrelevant, but since we're playing: what has GGW done to significantly reduce the increasing rate of violent crime in the District? Which kills far far far more people per year than unequivocally sad pedestrian deaths?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moved to the District in 1990 - coincidentally, the same year that GGW bro intern was born in Indiana. My inlaws and husband have lived here since the 60s. You know, the riots and all.

I have a hunch that in the near-term DC will feel like it did during the *late* Barry years, post riot and post intense crack wars … but still suboptimal and looking for revenue. With an overlay of ever-present graft and hesitant developers. I predict DC will again shuffle along for some years, until there is a big political change analogous to Tony Williams ♥️ This would lead business and banks to have the confidence to Do Big Things downtown, a la Abe Pollin ♥️

One thing that is clear is that this will require grown up, boring elected officials who understand big picture financials and aren’t jerked around by the short hairs by the likes of WABA and 4-person homeless nonprofit and donations

GGW bro is insulated from this environment because he never leaves his 4-block area, doesn’t have kids and doesn’t own a home. People like my family are insulated to this decline because we live in an enclave like historic Cleveland Park and can pay our way out of bullshit with private schools, locked garages and beach houses and we can weather the new taxes.

Two kids in a crosswalk on Georgia Ave we're just hit by a car this morning. Have fun ragging in GGW bros and WABA short hairs. But what are you proposing to make this a safer place for people to live?

That is very sad. That is also entirely irrelevant to my point.

Sort of like this is irrelevant, but since we're playing: what has GGW done to significantly reduce the increasing rate of violent crime in the District? Which kills far far far more people per year than unequivocally sad pedestrian deaths?

It's entirely relevant if you're mocking their advocacy for safer streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm more concerned about Metro. Will they ever get back to full ridership? They already had budget shortfalls before the pandemic.

What’s “full ridership”? Ridership peaked in 2009 and has been downhill since. WMATA loses money on every ride and yet they have foolishly been suckered into running empty buses and trains because some dudes goaded them into it because it’s convenient for them. In 2 years they will have wasted their once in a generation life support and that’s when the real pain begins.

How much money does DDOT get paid for our roads by people driving? It's been losing money on building roads since forever.

One difference between the two is that DDOT does not have a dedicated funding stream. WMATA and it’s boosters demanded a dedicated funding stream and now they have a dedicated funding stream. Once ARP funds disappear in 2024, they will need to figure out how to provide their services within the constraints of their fare recovery and dedicated local funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read every single reply, but one issue is traffic. I work downtown and most of my colleagues do want to be back in person at least half-time. But we don't *have* to be back in person. And right now the traffic into DC is really lousy because the DC government is more concerned with bike lanes and giving NWDC residents free street parking than in winning back office workers.

As long as I have to sit in a nightmare of 2 lanes on Conn Ave to get home at night, why should I bother? I can just meet colleagues for lunch when we want to have informal opportunities to interact. Some degree of personal flexibility on telework is now the norm for a lot of people, including many more USG offices than was previously the case. So if DC wants to ensure businesses thrive downtown, they'll have to make it worth our while. Revert to pre-Covid commuter traffic (including re-opening Beach Drive and the 4-lane rush hour switch on Conn Ave) and you'll get more of us back in the office and spending money at DC restaurants and shops.

DC resident here. We don't care what you think. You don't even pay DC taxes -- you don't own a home here and DC can't impose a commuter tax. You're a drain on our resources, not a net gain, and we don't care if you or your stinking car ever come back.

You're the perfect combination of a stubborn refusal to listen to any opposing viewpoints, and utmost certainty of your own.

I'm surprised you're not a Trump voter.

The Trump voters live in the suburbs. Now, tell me again why we should care about some commuter who doesn't set a foot into this city when she's not working and paying us zero dollars in taxes and doesn't know a thing about us other than her commute?

Because, you simpleton, your image of commuters leaving DC as soon as their workday is done is not based on reality. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Commuters do things like go out to happy hours with co-workers, dinners with friends, sporting events etc. And, if their view of DC is positive, they'll come into the District on weekends.

I say this as somebody who worked for a DC government development agency. DC can't impose a commuter tax, so it needs to make the District an attractive place to work, shop, and play. The District's fiscal stability is heavily tied to commuters. We've seen what happens to the District when suburban residents decide that the District is not an attractive place to spend their time and money, and it ain't pretty.

If you were smart, you'd want people from outside of DC to spend as much of their time and money as possible in the District.

Oh, please. How often does the average commuter living in the suburbs stay in town for happy hours and dinners or sporting events? I lived in a close-in suburb for 20+ years and worked downtown and almost never did, and I'm social. Most folks couldn't wait to get home.

Depends on your interests. It’s also about money spend on lunch, coffee, etc during the workday. Commuters spend plenty of money in DC and that’s revenue lost during telework.

Between coffee and lunch I was dropping $10 per day. Multiply that by 500,000 and that’s a lot of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm more concerned about Metro. Will they ever get back to full ridership? They already had budget shortfalls before the pandemic.

What’s “full ridership”? Ridership peaked in 2009 and has been downhill since. WMATA loses money on every ride and yet they have foolishly been suckered into running empty buses and trains because some dudes goaded them into it because it’s convenient for them. In 2 years they will have wasted their once in a generation life support and that’s when the real pain begins.

How much money does DDOT get paid for our roads by people driving? It's been losing money on building roads since forever.

One difference between the two is that DDOT does not have a dedicated funding stream. WMATA and it’s boosters demanded a dedicated funding stream and now they have a dedicated funding stream. Once ARP funds disappear in 2024, they will need to figure out how to provide their services within the constraints of their fare recovery and dedicated local funding.

Ok

DDOT has had dedicated funding streams from DC and doesn't make any money off it. Roads get people places. So does metro. Why do you only look to Metro to earn money off it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Work is far from the only reason I live in DC. It's baffling to me that folks are like "well I don't have to work in an office anymore, so I'll go live in Frederick." Like, don't you have friends? A social life?

I love the community I have here and I would not be able to replicate it in Frederick in a million years.

I know it’s a generalization, but I think a lot of the people (myself included) who are moving to the exurbs now that we don’t have to be in a DC office 5 days a week have a community that is largely wrapped up in our kids. That community will be replicated anywhere we move because the kids will go to new schools, we will meet the kids parents, etc. The dramatic difference in housing prospects also can’t be underestimated. The 750k house that we are buying in the exurbs would cost 1.5 million or more here. It’s just people in completely different life phases and/or with different priorities. Some people think walkability is non-negotiable, and I could not care less about it. I couldn’t handle being crammed into a 1500 sq ft house with my 2 kids and DH any longer, some people find that absurd. To each their own. But DC will be back, the interns and new graduates will return to the city (just as I came after college) and help pump up the economy again, and when they are ready to leave the city won’t miss a beat because there will be a new group ready to replace them. If DC wants to hold on to a portion of those people as they get older and have families though, they might want to address some of the quality of life issues that a 22 year old isn’t much concerned with.

Except you are talking about your own reality. The majority of households in this country do NOT have school-aged children. The wacky women of DCUM seem to forget that. And, since what seems like the beginning of time, parents with school-aged children have moved out of the city. You are not a trailblazer of a new trend, and your demographic is not the problem.

Look outside of your bubble for once.

Right, but the majority of people leaving DC for exurbs like Frederick are the people with children, which is what this exchange was about. Please focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned that the Mayor's development plan to build, build, build condos everywhere isn't taking these seismic changes into account. Is there a way to hit pause and see what the city REALLY needs? Maybe we need something we haven't even thought of yet as the draw, not condos everywhere.

They need residents to replace office workers and tourists. DC (and Clarendon) have a strong grip on young people. So there are basically two residential markets they can target: (1) retirees and (2) families.

DC will not be attractive to retirees until and unless they address quality of life issues. Also, retiree interests directly contradict the interests of young people so to attract one you have to unattractive to the other. So the other hope would be to attract more families. But DC decided a long time ago that families were more expensive than they were worth so every neighborhood is being reimagined as a playground for young people. There is no longer any suitable housing stock for families because everything that has been built in the last decade are studios and 1bds. So DC is poorly positioned to capture that market.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm more concerned about Metro. Will they ever get back to full ridership? They already had budget shortfalls before the pandemic.

What’s “full ridership”? Ridership peaked in 2009 and has been downhill since. WMATA loses money on every ride and yet they have foolishly been suckered into running empty buses and trains because some dudes goaded them into it because it’s convenient for them. In 2 years they will have wasted their once in a generation life support and that’s when the real pain begins.

How much money does DDOT get paid for our roads by people driving? It's been losing money on building roads since forever.

One difference between the two is that DDOT does not have a dedicated funding stream. WMATA and it’s boosters demanded a dedicated funding stream and now they have a dedicated funding stream. Once ARP funds disappear in 2024, they will need to figure out how to provide their services within the constraints of their fare recovery and dedicated local funding.

Ok

DDOT has had dedicated funding streams from DC and doesn't make any money off it. Roads get people places. So does metro. Why do you only look to Metro to earn money off it?

This is all tangential but can you point me to DDOTs statutory dedicated funding from DC? Any given year DDOTs funding can be zeroed out. WMATAs dedicated funding is secured from sales tax revenue. Anyway, there is no point in this discussion because I don’t care about WMATA. The reality is that they will be facing another fiscal cliff very soon, like they do every few years and next time local governments will not be as sympathetic for a bailout because they gave them what they said they needed: dedicated funding.

WMATA is a fiscally reckless and wasteful agency. It always has been. Fed bailouts have staved off their day of reckoning but it will come all the same unless they get Fed bailouts in perpetuity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Work is far from the only reason I live in DC. It's baffling to me that folks are like "well I don't have to work in an office anymore, so I'll go live in Frederick." Like, don't you have friends? A social life?

I love the community I have here and I would not be able to replicate it in Frederick in a million years.

I know it’s a generalization, but I think a lot of the people (myself included) who are moving to the exurbs now that we don’t have to be in a DC office 5 days a week have a community that is largely wrapped up in our kids. That community will be replicated anywhere we move because the kids will go to new schools, we will meet the kids parents, etc. The dramatic difference in housing prospects also can’t be underestimated. The 750k house that we are buying in the exurbs would cost 1.5 million or more here. It’s just people in completely different life phases and/or with different priorities. Some people think walkability is non-negotiable, and I could not care less about it. I couldn’t handle being crammed into a 1500 sq ft house with my 2 kids and DH any longer, some people find that absurd. To each their own. But DC will be back, the interns and new graduates will return to the city (just as I came after college) and help pump up the economy again, and when they are ready to leave the city won’t miss a beat because there will be a new group ready to replace them. If DC wants to hold on to a portion of those people as they get older and have families though, they might want to address some of the quality of life issues that a 22 year old isn’t much concerned with.

Except you are talking about your own reality. The majority of households in this country do NOT have school-aged children. The wacky women of DCUM seem to forget that. And, since what seems like the beginning of time, parents with school-aged children have moved out of the city. You are not a trailblazer of a new trend, and your demographic is not the problem.

Look outside of your bubble for once.

Right, but the majority of people leaving DC for exurbs like Frederick are the people with children, which is what this exchange was about. Please focus.

They pretty clearly are so wrapped up in their own life that they cannot conceive that people could possibly have different wants, needs and interests. Or that it doesn’t take a “majority” but just enough people to choose differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned that the Mayor's development plan to build, build, build condos everywhere isn't taking these seismic changes into account. Is there a way to hit pause and see what the city REALLY needs? Maybe we need something we haven't even thought of yet as the draw, not condos everywhere.

They need residents to replace office workers and tourists. DC (and Clarendon) have a strong grip on young people. So there are basically two residential markets they can target: (1) retirees and (2) families.

DC will not be attractive to retirees until and unless they address quality of life issues. Also, retiree interests directly contradict the interests of young people so to attract one you have to unattractive to the other. So the other hope would be to attract more families. But DC decided a long time ago that families were more expensive than they were worth so every neighborhood is being reimagined as a playground for young people. There is no longer any suitable housing stock for families because everything that has been built in the last decade are studios and 1bds. So DC is poorly positioned to capture that market.

I dont agree retiree interests are antithetical. Lots of retirees moved into Reimagined Gallery Place for example. There is crossover. Agree with the rest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned that the Mayor's development plan to build, build, build condos everywhere isn't taking these seismic changes into account. Is there a way to hit pause and see what the city REALLY needs? Maybe we need something we haven't even thought of yet as the draw, not condos everywhere.

They need residents to replace office workers and tourists. DC (and Clarendon) have a strong grip on young people. So there are basically two residential markets they can target: (1) retirees and (2) families.

DC will not be attractive to retirees until and unless they address quality of life issues. Also, retiree interests directly contradict the interests of young people so to attract one you have to unattractive to the other. So the other hope would be to attract more families. But DC decided a long time ago that families were more expensive than they were worth so every neighborhood is being reimagined as a playground for young people. There is no longer any suitable housing stock for families because everything that has been built in the last decade are studios and 1bds. So DC is poorly positioned to capture that market.

I dont agree retiree interests are antithetical. Lots of retirees moved into Reimagined Gallery Place for example. There is crossover. Agree with the rest.

I think they're stereotyping older people. I know some older people that are nothing like the stereotype but plenty are certainly caricatures of it. These stereotypes are: NIMBYs that hate change and don't want any improvements because of the "character" of a neighborhood. They want low taxes and don't care about school because they pay taxes but no longer have kids in school. They want noise ordinances and complain to the police if you're cutting the grass or making a lot of noise 1 minute past the time the ordinance starts. They watch Fox News all day and rail against social issues that have no impact on their lives (or what's left of them).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read every single reply, but one issue is traffic. I work downtown and most of my colleagues do want to be back in person at least half-time. But we don't *have* to be back in person. And right now the traffic into DC is really lousy because the DC government is more concerned with bike lanes and giving NWDC residents free street parking than in winning back office workers.

As long as I have to sit in a nightmare of 2 lanes on Conn Ave to get home at night, why should I bother? I can just meet colleagues for lunch when we want to have informal opportunities to interact. Some degree of personal flexibility on telework is now the norm for a lot of people, including many more USG offices than was previously the case. So if DC wants to ensure businesses thrive downtown, they'll have to make it worth our while. Revert to pre-Covid commuter traffic (including re-opening Beach Drive and the 4-lane rush hour switch on Conn Ave) and you'll get more of us back in the office and spending money at DC restaurants and shops.

DC resident here. We don't care what you think. You don't even pay DC taxes -- you don't own a home here and DC can't impose a commuter tax. You're a drain on our resources, not a net gain, and we don't care if you or your stinking car ever come back.

You're the perfect combination of a stubborn refusal to listen to any opposing viewpoints, and utmost certainty of your own.

I'm surprised you're not a Trump voter.

The Trump voters live in the suburbs. Now, tell me again why we should care about some commuter who doesn't set a foot into this city when she's not working and paying us zero dollars in taxes and doesn't know a thing about us other than her commute?

Because, you simpleton, your image of commuters leaving DC as soon as their workday is done is not based on reality. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Commuters do things like go out to happy hours with co-workers, dinners with friends, sporting events etc. And, if their view of DC is positive, they'll come into the District on weekends.

I say this as somebody who worked for a DC government development agency. DC can't impose a commuter tax, so it needs to make the District an attractive place to work, shop, and play. The District's fiscal stability is heavily tied to commuters. We've seen what happens to the District when suburban residents decide that the District is not an attractive place to spend their time and money, and it ain't pretty.

If you were smart, you'd want people from outside of DC to spend as much of their time and money as possible in the District.

Oh, please. How often does the average commuter living in the suburbs stay in town for happy hours and dinners or sporting events? I lived in a close-in suburb for 20+ years and worked downtown and almost never did, and I'm social. Most folks couldn't wait to get home.

Depends on your interests. It’s also about money spend on lunch, coffee, etc during the workday. Commuters spend plenty of money in DC and that’s revenue lost during telework.

Between coffee and lunch I was dropping $10 per day. Multiply that by 500,000 and that’s a lot of money.

DP. I was someone who probably did that 1-2x per week at most. But if there are any coffee/lunch spots still there when I do return to the office, I plan to partake in the higher end of that scale, for a while at least. The transition back will be rough enough!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the article and thought "meh." Everything that it reported applies equally to other large cities.

And yet, NYC seems to be bounding back while DC is not.

And yet our real estate market is still hot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not surprised that DC has been hit harder than other cities.

There are many people who live in NY, LA, SF etc because they are world class cities and have a lot to offer.

Most people live in DC because of....work. Now there have been shifts in work structures that will likely result in a portion of DC office workers having a hybrid or fully remote work arrangement. I don’t see these people staying chained to DC like I might expect someone to still stay in NY or LA.

On top of that, add in the high COL, social unrest, homeless people and crime. DC is on the decline. It’s pretty easy to figure this out. Now see what happens with a government shutdown!

We actually live in DC b/c we love DC. What social unrest? The Trumpers who came and left? SF and LA don't have a worse homeless situation than DC? Really?