Soooo, how is high-density looking to everyone now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mayor’s plan is to upzone Ward 3 significantly to direct new residents to that part of the city and thereby reduce the gentrification pressure in the “real DC.”

That makes no sense. I live in Ward 4 and they are building high-end condos everywhere. Pretty soon Ward 4 will be predominantly white. Huge, huge change.

They’re not building condos on Cresteood. In fact, the comprehensive plan proposals provide additional protections to “ preserve neighborhood character” even while the comp plan changes would diminish zoning safeguards in other neighborhoods.

If you notice, Ward 4 (which is full of evil SFHs) was mostly exempted from comprehensive plan changes. If you also notice, Bowser lives there.

So does a consultant to the Office of Planning, a fellow at a DC think tank, an unabashed cheerleader for “smart growth” and ending SFH zoning in Ward 3.

Isuch hypocrisy when Crestwood residents prescribe more height and density for DC neighborhoods ... other than Crestwood.

Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Yes, its hypocrisy. It also makes you wonder what they dont like about high density, since they dont particularly want to live in it themselves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, its hypocrisy. It also makes you wonder what they dont like about high density, since they dont particularly want to live in it themselves?

And the mayor has proposed additional safeguards for a Crestwood and certain other “Rock Creek East” planning area neighborhoods, even as she tries to weaken existing zoning and historic protection for “Rock Creek West” neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

True that.

When policies focus on helping the lower income population at the direct detriment of middle class families, that is a huge failure in policy. And, we see that again and again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, its hypocrisy. It also makes you wonder what they dont like about high density, since they dont particularly want to live in it themselves?

And the mayor has proposed additional safeguards for a Crestwood and certain other “Rock Creek East” planning area neighborhoods, even as she tries to weaken existing zoning and historic protection for “Rock Creek West” neighborhoods.

This is such a weird point the Ward 3 NIMBYs keep making.

Crestwood doesn't have a commercial strip on which to upzone - do you want to upzone 30 foot wide Argyle Terrace? Even 16th Street is just 2 lanes in each direction and even if you upzoned the single family lots it doesn't give you much land to work with.

Just like no single family lots in Ward 3 are proposed for upzoning no single family lots in Ward 4 are either.

And for what its worth (not that facts matter to people who live in an echo chamber) the Walter Reed re-development is the single biggest un-built approved housing project in the city and it happens to be in guess where - Ward 4 - and as a bonus it is within walking distance of where the Mayor lives!

So what are the "additional safeguards" for Crestwood - maybe you can cite them for us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

True that.

When policies focus on helping the lower income population at the direct detriment of middle class families, that is a huge failure in policy. And, we see that again and again.

Studies have shown that the lower your income the greater the burden of a long commute because the lost wages disproportionately impact you.

But the answer is to build enough housing in the city (and elsewhere) for the middle class and the working class - DC actually provides a lot of heavily subsidized housing and has plenty of housing for the upper middle class and upper class since the wealthy in particular can always bid prices up but falls short on housing for the middle class and lower income working class who may not qualify for subsidized housing.

So the biggest failure in policy is simply in not building enough housing. But many DC homeowners don't care if DC becomes another San Francisco and why should they as they would benefit from housing inflation and don't care about the burden that imposes on others or about living in a city with such inequities.

[Anonymous]

This thread is starting to demonstrate that you can find a study to prove anything. The study mentioned from PP is all over the place, though probably just restated not very clearly and not the studies fault. It also gets to the issue of how you define the different economic classes.

So by PP's explanation, if we build enough housing in the city and elsewhere (where, are we building in the city and elsewhere now) lower income people will move to that housing. PP parses middle class to fit the several argument they make. And they love throwing inequities into an argument because you never have to define them. You just salt your argument and walk off nobly with your nose held high.

San Francisco is an interesting example because it has tried to do the exact same thing Mayor Bowser proposes and it has been a smashing failure.

Anyway, I think you just need to look at any of the other dozen or so Corona virus threads on DCUM and see that OP's assertion seems to be bearing out in that people want more space, roads to walk on, parks to walk in, dedicated dog areas, dedicated bicycling areas, wider isled super markets, etc. I am not sure how high rises and densified population solve ANY of the issues people are talking about now.

[Anonymous]

There are lots of examples of public housing in high rises that have failed miserably. This is not a new concept. People tend not to take care of things they are given.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

True that.

When policies focus on helping the lower income population at the direct detriment of middle class families, that is a huge failure in policy. And, we see that again and again.

Studies have shown that the lower your income the greater the burden of a long commute because the lost wages disproportionately impact you.

But the answer is to build enough housing in the city (and elsewhere) for the middle class and the working class - DC actually provides a lot of heavily subsidized housing and has plenty of housing for the upper middle class and upper class since the wealthy in particular can always bid prices up but falls short on housing for the middle class and lower income working class who may not qualify for subsidized housing.

So the biggest failure in policy is simply in not building enough housing. But many DC homeowners don't care if DC becomes another San Francisco and why should they as they would benefit from housing inflation and don't care about the burden that imposes on others or about living in a city with such inequities.

Are we a fully socialist country now? Why not raze everything and build communist style housing blocs? I'm sure people would vie to live in DC then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

You think middle class people lived in public housing in major cities at the turn of the 21st century?

You really need to read up on HUD policies. There was a concerted effort to flip cities that involved moving public housing residents and voucher holders out of cities to the older, grubbier suburbs. It has concentrated poverty away from services. Which is why MoCo is struggling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s an interesting link to 25 new developments coming on line now or shortly, most in DC. The development lobby that has effectively captured the mayor’s office claims that DC needs to upzone to build many more of these, especially west of Rock Creek Park. So much for “affordable housing.”

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/a-virtual-tour-of-more-than-25-dc-area-developments/16643

The message: Poor people need to get out.

When poor people are displaced to suburbs they lose access to jobs and services. Look at what happened to the public housing residents of MD who were moved to places like Glen Bernie, Beltsville, and Gaithersburg.

Nope this is just a lie

The people who move to those suburbs aren’t poor - they are middle class - they live there and commute because it’s all they can afford because low income people get free or very cheap nice housing closer in

It’s apparently a crime for low income people to have to commute to work but it’s ok for a middle class person to do it

It’s ridiculous they way people say that there are no low income jobs in the suburbs. Of course there are! Strip malls, shopping centers, restaurants are available en masse in every DC suburb

True that.

When policies focus on helping the lower income population at the direct detriment of middle class families, that is a huge failure in policy. And, we see that again and again.

Studies have shown that the lower your income the greater the burden of a long commute because the lost wages disproportionately impact you.

But the answer is to build enough housing in the city (and elsewhere) for the middle class and the working class - DC actually provides a lot of heavily subsidized housing and has plenty of housing for the upper middle class and upper class since the wealthy in particular can always bid prices up but falls short on housing for the middle class and lower income working class who may not qualify for subsidized housing.

So the biggest failure in policy is simply in not building enough housing. But many DC homeowners don't care if DC becomes another San Francisco and why should they as they would benefit from housing inflation and don't care about the burden that imposes on others or about living in a city with such inequities.

Are we a fully socialist country now? Why not raze everything and build communist style housing blocs? I'm sure people would vie to live in DC then.

This isn’t about affordable housing, folks. That is just a pretext for the mayor to increase allowable height and density in neighborhoods like Chevy Chase and Cleveland Park, so that her crony developers can reap huge profits by building 13 story luxury condo buildings. The proponents claim that a minuscule percentage of “inclusive zoning” units (which are pegged at fairly high income levels) in such upscale projects will make housing affordable. That’s bunk - it’s trickle down theory and the public can see through the B.S.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This isn’t about affordable housing, folks. That is just a pretext for the mayor to increase allowable height and density in neighborhoods like Chevy Chase and Cleveland Park, so that her crony developers can reap huge profits by building 13 story luxury condo buildings. The proponents claim that a minuscule percentage of “inclusive zoning” units (which are pegged at fairly high income levels) in such upscale projects will make housing affordable. That’s bunk - it’s trickle down theory and the public can see through the B.S.

Let's talk about the profit that developers made while building neighborhoods like Chevy Chase and Cleveland Park - Chevy Chase Land Company and Cleveland Park Land Company, respectively. If they hadn't developed, at a tidy profit, you wouldn't be living there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This isn’t about affordable housing, folks. That is just a pretext for the mayor to increase allowable height and density in neighborhoods like Chevy Chase and Cleveland Park, so that her crony developers can reap huge profits by building 13 story luxury condo buildings. The proponents claim that a minuscule percentage of “inclusive zoning” units (which are pegged at fairly high income levels) in such upscale projects will make housing affordable. That’s bunk - it’s trickle down theory and the public can see through the B.S.

Let's talk about the profit that developers made while building neighborhoods like Chevy Chase and Cleveland Park - Chevy Chase Land Company and Cleveland Park Land Company, respectively. If they hadn't developed, at a tidy profit, you wouldn't be living there.

I think that people value these neighborhoods for the leafy quiet streets, the fact that folks often know their neighbors, and that you can see the sky. Put up a lot of 10-14 story buildings across the neighborhoods and they lose much of the character that makes them special. There’s still plenty of vacant or nearly vacant (ie parking lots) large parcels in the city, to add thousands of housing units. Each of the aforementioned neighborhoods already has a number of apartment buildings on the avenues, so why is it necessary to build over single family streets and pedestrian scale historic districts ?