We need homes. A lot of homes. Not just affordable, but also middle-income homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, I must continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to buy property anywhere you want to at the price you want to pay.

And you don’t have a right over another person’s property. Up zoning just gives your neighbor a choice of SFH or more dense housing. If they want to build a triplex, that’s their right.

Why are you so interested in destroying SFH neighborhoods?? If I buy a house in neighborhood of SFHs, that is what I want in a neighborhood. No, I do not want to live in a neighborhood of SFHs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Otherwise, I live elsewhere. And, in the DMV, I have options. Guess who pays the taxes. Those in the larger SFHs. Note also that, while DC may be growing now, it has not always, and its growth rate is actually slowing. DC still has not returned to its 1950 level when over 800K people lived in DC. In 2000, DC was as low as 572K, at a time when the DMV was booming. DC has plenty of space to build residential housing. The only folks pushing upzoning are smaller developers, plus those who wish to change the character of other people's neighborhoods.

It’s all projection. They claim that you should not be able to control others but at the same time they want to force everyone to live the way they want them to and they want to make every neighborhood the way they want it. They are trying to eliminate consumer choice. It’s a very egocentric and dictatorial perspective that they have.

You can't actually believe your own nonsense can you? You know how foolish you look and this is just the last straw you've grasped at to be able to justify your insane, selfish views, right?

Because right now, you're saying the side that wants to give property owners the right to CHOOSE what to build on their property, that wants to give consumers the right to CHOOSE to live in multifamily, duplex, or rowhouse housing in more neighborhoods is the anti-choice side because they want to, what? Take away your right to tell other people what other people do with their property? Nobody is forcing you to do anything. If you don't want multifamily housing on your property, don't build it, it's that simple. The only thing we want to "force" you to do is accept that things change, neighborhoods need to evolve to serve growing and changing populations, and the world does not revolve around you, all concepts which adults already understand. Sorry for your arrested development, maybe with some effort and introspection someday you'll mature, start growing as a person, and catch up with the rest of us.

DP. You seem to think we are starting with a blank slate. That’s not accurate. There are existing zoning laws in place that regulate what owners can build on their land. As a nimby, I just want to keep those the same. You may feel very self-righteous fighting to change the laws in my neighborhood that you don’t live in, but to me, it just looks like you think the world revolves around you and your preferences.

Lol, okay NIMBY

Strong comeback.

I honestly don’t find it insulting to be called a NIMBY. I freely admit I want to keep the things I like about my home and neighborhood.

Okay but realize you are the one who thinks the world revolves around them. You are trying to control others, not the people advocating for upzoning. Upzoning only gives property owners more choices—it doesn’t mandate increases in density. You are the one forcing your preferences on others.

Why don’t you address the points from the people above?

Instead of merits you want to make it an argument if personalities.

I have a question for you, why do you find it offensive that there maybe be a few blocks here and there in DC with SFH?

Have you ever been to NYC? Try taking a trip out to Brooklyn or Queens. It is totally normal for every city to feature a variety of building types and it is totally normal for cities to organize themselves such that there is order to how the areas of the building types are organized.

I honestly don’t think you realize how extreme your view is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, I must continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to buy property anywhere you want to at the price you want to pay.

And you don’t have a right over another person’s property. Up zoning just gives your neighbor a choice of SFH or more dense housing. If they want to build a triplex, that’s their right.

Why are you so interested in destroying SFH neighborhoods?? If I buy a house in neighborhood of SFHs, that is what I want in a neighborhood. No, I do not want to live in a neighborhood of SFHs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Otherwise, I live elsewhere. And, in the DMV, I have options. Guess who pays the taxes. Those in the larger SFHs. Note also that, while DC may be growing now, it has not always, and its growth rate is actually slowing. DC still has not returned to its 1950 level when over 800K people lived in DC. In 2000, DC was as low as 572K, at a time when the DMV was booming. DC has plenty of space to build residential housing. The only folks pushing upzoning are smaller developers, plus those who wish to change the character of other people's neighborhoods.

It’s all projection. They claim that you should not be able to control others but at the same time they want to force everyone to live the way they want them to and they want to make every neighborhood the way they want it. They are trying to eliminate consumer choice. It’s a very egocentric and dictatorial perspective that they have.

You can't actually believe your own nonsense can you? You know how foolish you look and this is just the last straw you've grasped at to be able to justify your insane, selfish views, right?

Because right now, you're saying the side that wants to give property owners the right to CHOOSE what to build on their property, that wants to give consumers the right to CHOOSE to live in multifamily, duplex, or rowhouse housing in more neighborhoods is the anti-choice side because they want to, what? Take away your right to tell other people what other people do with their property? Nobody is forcing you to do anything. If you don't want multifamily housing on your property, don't build it, it's that simple. The only thing we want to "force" you to do is accept that things change, neighborhoods need to evolve to serve growing and changing populations, and the world does not revolve around you, all concepts which adults already understand. Sorry for your arrested development, maybe with some effort and introspection someday you'll mature, start growing as a person, and catch up with the rest of us.

DP. You seem to think we are starting with a blank slate. That’s not accurate. There are existing zoning laws in place that regulate what owners can build on their land. As a nimby, I just want to keep those the same. You may feel very self-righteous fighting to change the laws in my neighborhood that you don’t live in, but to me, it just looks like you think the world revolves around you and your preferences.

Lol, okay NIMBY

Strong comeback.

I honestly don’t find it insulting to be called a NIMBY. I freely admit I want to keep the things I like about my home and neighborhood.

I Could not agree more. If the YIMBY want affordable housing on their community green space - go right ahead! Enjoy! Zoning restrictions - which we all review prior to making a home purchase - are a consideration and baked into the price tag of the price we agree to pay. It’s that simple. So - agree with PP - why should you, random YIMBY - dictate my the zoning in my neighborhood? We all a paid a price for our homes that reflect the zoning laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, I must continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to buy property anywhere you want to at the price you want to pay.

And you don’t have a right over another person’s property. Up zoning just gives your neighbor a choice of SFH or more dense housing. If they want to build a triplex, that’s their right.

Why are you so interested in destroying SFH neighborhoods?? If I buy a house in neighborhood of SFHs, that is what I want in a neighborhood. No, I do not want to live in a neighborhood of SFHs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Otherwise, I live elsewhere. And, in the DMV, I have options. Guess who pays the taxes. Those in the larger SFHs. Note also that, while DC may be growing now, it has not always, and its growth rate is actually slowing. DC still has not returned to its 1950 level when over 800K people lived in DC. In 2000, DC was as low as 572K, at a time when the DMV was booming. DC has plenty of space to build residential housing. The only folks pushing upzoning are smaller developers, plus those who wish to change the character of other people's neighborhoods.

It’s all projection. They claim that you should not be able to control others but at the same time they want to force everyone to live the way they want them to and they want to make every neighborhood the way they want it. They are trying to eliminate consumer choice. It’s a very egocentric and dictatorial perspective that they have.

You can't actually believe your own nonsense can you? You know how foolish you look and this is just the last straw you've grasped at to be able to justify your insane, selfish views, right?

Because right now, you're saying the side that wants to give property owners the right to CHOOSE what to build on their property, that wants to give consumers the right to CHOOSE to live in multifamily, duplex, or rowhouse housing in more neighborhoods is the anti-choice side because they want to, what? Take away your right to tell other people what other people do with their property? Nobody is forcing you to do anything. If you don't want multifamily housing on your property, don't build it, it's that simple. The only thing we want to "force" you to do is accept that things change, neighborhoods need to evolve to serve growing and changing populations, and the world does not revolve around you, all concepts which adults already understand. Sorry for your arrested development, maybe with some effort and introspection someday you'll mature, start growing as a person, and catch up with the rest of us.

DP. You seem to think we are starting with a blank slate. That’s not accurate. There are existing zoning laws in place that regulate what owners can build on their land. As a nimby, I just want to keep those the same. You may feel very self-righteous fighting to change the laws in my neighborhood that you don’t live in, but to me, it just looks like you think the world revolves around you and your preferences.

Lol, okay NIMBY

Strong comeback.

I honestly don’t find it insulting to be called a NIMBY. I freely admit I want to keep the things I like about my home and neighborhood.

Okay but realize you are the one who thinks the world revolves around them. You are trying to control others, not the people advocating for upzoning. Upzoning only gives property owners more choices—it doesn’t mandate increases in density. You are the one forcing your preferences on others

You got it backwards. I’m advocating for the status quo - that is, keeping zoning regulations as they are. You want things to be changed to match your preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
However, I must continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to buy property anywhere you want to at the price you want to pay.

And you don’t have a right over another person’s property. Up zoning just gives your neighbor a choice of SFH or more dense housing. If they want to build a triplex, that’s their right.

Why are you so interested in destroying SFH neighborhoods?? If I buy a house in neighborhood of SFHs, that is what I want in a neighborhood. No, I do not want to live in a neighborhood of SFHs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Otherwise, I live elsewhere. And, in the DMV, I have options. Guess who pays the taxes. Those in the larger SFHs. Note also that, while DC may be growing now, it has not always, and its growth rate is actually slowing. DC still has not returned to its 1950 level when over 800K people lived in DC. In 2000, DC was as low as 572K, at a time when the DMV was booming. DC has plenty of space to build residential housing. The only folks pushing upzoning are smaller developers, plus those who wish to change the character of other people's neighborhoods.

It’s all projection. They claim that you should not be able to control others but at the same time they want to force everyone to live the way they want them to and they want to make every neighborhood the way they want it. They are trying to eliminate consumer choice. It’s a very egocentric and dictatorial perspective that they have.

You can't actually believe your own nonsense can you? You know how foolish you look and this is just the last straw you've grasped at to be able to justify your insane, selfish views, right?

Because right now, you're saying the side that wants to give property owners the right to CHOOSE what to build on their property, that wants to give consumers the right to CHOOSE to live in multifamily, duplex, or rowhouse housing in more neighborhoods is the anti-choice side because they want to, what? Take away your right to tell other people what other people do with their property? Nobody is forcing you to do anything. If you don't want multifamily housing on your property, don't build it, it's that simple. The only thing we want to "force" you to do is accept that things change, neighborhoods need to evolve to serve growing and changing populations, and the world does not revolve around you, all concepts which adults already understand. Sorry for your arrested development, maybe with some effort and introspection someday you'll mature, start growing as a person, and catch up with the rest of us.

DP. You seem to think we are starting with a blank slate. That’s not accurate. There are existing zoning laws in place that regulate what owners can build on their land. As a nimby, I just want to keep those the same. You may feel very self-righteous fighting to change the laws in my neighborhood that you don’t live in, but to me, it just looks like you think the world revolves around you and your preferences.

Lol, okay NIMBY

Strong comeback.

I honestly don’t find it insulting to be called a NIMBY. I freely admit I want to keep the things I like about my home and neighborhood.

I Could not agree more. If the YIMBY want affordable housing on their community green space - go right ahead! Enjoy! Zoning restrictions - which we all review prior to making a home purchase - are a consideration and baked into the price tag of the price we agree to pay. It’s that simple. So - agree with PP - why should you, random YIMBY - dictate my the zoning in my neighborhood? We all a paid a price for our homes that reflect the zoning laws.

+1. Well said.

[Anonymous]

“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

DC actually has a lot of affordable rental housing. There is no shortage of rental housing and right now is a great time to rent because rents are falling fast, with a significant number of centally located areas seeing YoY declines of over 12%
https://dcist.com/story/20/12/07/this-map-shows-where-rents-are-dropping-in-d-c/

Your problem is that you are upset that you cannot afford to buy what you want in a neighborhood you want.

[Anonymous]

There are owners and non-owners allied with developers whether they realize it or not. The owners will keep out denser zoning as long as they can through a combination of political power and their ability to hire good lawyers. The non owners will serve as the unwitting political front for developers who have their own deep pockets. But at the end of the day - when the developers win - there is one thing for sure. People looking for affordable housing will be still be searching for homes in Germantown and Leesburg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

And those who live in the SFHs want to live in a SFH. They will leave town. DMV has plenty of nearby options. And guess what? Pandemic means I do not have to go to the office everyday. And guess who pays the taxes in this town-those who live in those large SFHs. DC has plenty of affordable housing. Check out zillow. The idea that DC is overly crowded is bizzare. DC has fewer people today than it did in 1950.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



I think it is a combination of astroturfing for developers, as you say (they have refused to reveal their funders but have a lot of developers on their Board), but also just extremely motivated self-interest. People in their 20s want cheaper apartments to rent and think allowing developers to build thousands of units of Studio "luxury" apartments will somehow make their apartment cheaper because "economics".

Well yes, without those luxury units, the people who moved in there would have needed another place to stay. Perhaps they room up with someone else instead, or other options, but they would be providing competition for the available apartments.

Those luxury units also have a price effects on existing rental stock which drives the price of those units higher. This is how gentrification works. You really need to read past the Freshman level textbooks folks.
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/mdavidson/files/2012/02/Davidson-Lees-2010-New-Build-Gentrification.pdf

God, this is just so incorrect. Have you owned a rental before? Jesus. You can't raise rent if there are 20 people in line for your apartment.

https://www.upjohn.org/research-highlights/new-apartment-buildings-low-income-areas-decrease-nearby-rents

Imagine thinking non-peer reviewed “policy briefs” prove your point. If we want to include non-peer reviewed research then enjoy.
https://www.cura.umn.edu/research/research/build-baby-build-housing-submarkets-and-effects-new-construction-existing-rents

Net effect is driving up rent on lower priced units while reducing price on comparable rent units.

Lol, that paper sponsored by mhponline.org.

Try again.

Simple fact is this. Georgetown hasn't built any housing, yet is the most expensive area in DC. We've adding 100,000 people to the city over the years, and for certain have not built that much housing over that time. Additionally, prices went down all across the region during COVID (supply and demand much?)

Finally, your solution (banning market rate housing because "evil developers") is nonsense. What happens to the 1000 (mostly middle income) people moving here every month? Do they live on the streets? Please, think about how silly your idea is and how it just doesn't work, at all.

DC continues to have fewer residents than it did in 1950. There is plenty of housing in the DMV, even inner DMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

And those who live in the SFHs want to live in a SFH. They will leave town. DMV has plenty of nearby options. And guess what? Pandemic means I do not have to go to the office everyday. And guess who pays the taxes in this town-those who live in those large SFHs. DC has plenty of affordable housing. Check out zillow. The idea that DC is overly crowded is bizzare. DC has fewer people today than it did in 1950.

You can still live in a SFH. No one is proposing to demolish your house and replace it with apartments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

DC actually has a lot of affordable rental housing. There is no shortage of rental housing and right now is a great time to rent because rents are falling fast, with a significant number of centally located areas seeing YoY declines of over 12%
https://dcist.com/story/20/12/07/this-map-shows-where-rents-are-dropping-in-d-c/

Your problem is that you are upset that you cannot afford to buy what you want in a neighborhood you want.

I find this interesting. The two young couples who plaintively testified "for" upzoning at our ANC meeting were currently living happiiy in ... ta-da... rentals in the neighborhood. I did the same at their age. The concern they expressed was not being able to afford a larger home in the same neighborhood as their family expanded. So they were "for" upzoning. Can someone explain how upzoning in Ward 3 will help this family afford a large home? I was left confused. Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

And those who live in the SFHs want to live in a SFH. They will leave town. DMV has plenty of nearby options. And guess what? Pandemic means I do not have to go to the office everyday. And guess who pays the taxes in this town-those who live in those large SFHs. DC has plenty of affordable housing. Check out zillow. The idea that DC is overly crowded is bizzare. DC has fewer people today than it did in 1950.

You can still live in a SFH. No one is proposing to demolish your house and replace it with apartments.

I do not want my SFH to be next to an apartment building. I want my SFH to be in a neighborhood of SFHs. Otherwise, I do not buy that SFH, and I promise you its market value will decrease dramatically with an apartment building next to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

DC actually has a lot of affordable rental housing. There is no shortage of rental housing and right now is a great time to rent because rents are falling fast, with a significant number of centally located areas seeing YoY declines of over 12%
https://dcist.com/story/20/12/07/this-map-shows-where-rents-are-dropping-in-d-c/

Your problem is that you are upset that you cannot afford to buy what you want in a neighborhood you want.

I find this interesting. The two young couples who plaintively testified "for" upzoning at our ANC meeting were currently living happiiy in ... ta-da... rentals in the neighborhood. I did the same at their age. The concern they expressed was not being able to afford a larger home in the same neighborhood as their family expanded. So they were "for" upzoning. Can someone explain how upzoning in Ward 3 will help this family afford a large home? I was left confused. Thanks!

This is the real root of this problem. Decades, if you could not afford a house in DC, you bought in the burbs. Many current buyers want their cake and eat it too. And then jobs developed in the burbs so you do not have to drive into DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

DC actually has a lot of affordable rental housing. There is no shortage of rental housing and right now is a great time to rent because rents are falling fast, with a significant number of centally located areas seeing YoY declines of over 12%
https://dcist.com/story/20/12/07/this-map-shows-where-rents-are-dropping-in-d-c/

Your problem is that you are upset that you cannot afford to buy what you want in a neighborhood you want.

I know. When I lived in NYC, I always complained that I could not afford a 2 bedroom condo near the Met Museum on Fifth Avenue. I tried to get NYC to add more affordable housing in the area, but no one listened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Zoning” is just a law passed by society to achieve societal goals.

If you didn’t anticipate the risk of having to let more people into your neighborhood which may affect your sacred property value as artificial house scarcity is rolled back— well that’s your fault. Because big companies and the wealthy anticipated that risk. As did I when I bought my house. I priced that risk in.

Society needs more housing to make high demand urban areas accessible to all. That’s why we, as a society, will roll back zoning restrictions and allow more housing.

DC actually has a lot of affordable rental housing. There is no shortage of rental housing and right now is a great time to rent because rents are falling fast, with a significant number of centally located areas seeing YoY declines of over 12%
https://dcist.com/story/20/12/07/this-map-shows-where-rents-are-dropping-in-d-c/

Your problem is that you are upset that you cannot afford to buy what you want in a neighborhood you want.

I find this interesting. The two young couples who plaintively testified "for" upzoning at our ANC meeting were currently living happiiy in ... ta-da... rentals in the neighborhood. I did the same at their age. The concern they expressed was not being able to afford a larger home in the same neighborhood as their family expanded. So they were "for" upzoning. Can someone explain how upzoning in Ward 3 will help this family afford a large home? I was left confused. Thanks!

This is the real root of this problem. Decades, if you could not afford a house in DC, you bought in the burbs. Many current buyers want their cake and eat it too. And then jobs developed in the burbs so you do not have to drive into DC.

I just didn't understand it. They said they loved the neighborhood and didn't want to move out, so they supported upzoning. It seems like their choice is to stay in an apartment (I, and loads of people do this with children in the plentiful available apartments in the 'hood), or increase their earning power and buy a house or duplex. They didn't want the apartment option though. I completely failed to understand how upzoing would increase their earning power or the availability of SFH they craved or bring down home prices of said. They just seemed very non-plussed about not being able to afford a SFH in the location they liked.