Erlich promises to kill Purple Line dreams

[Anonymous]

PP, should read:

Meanwhile, more and more folks are flocking to the suburbs:
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/0120_poverty_kneebone.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, you're absolutely right. The population of the suburbs continues metastasize. And as the growth continues to sprawl ever outward, the region's transportation network continues to fall apart, or hadn't you noticed that Metro, the interstates, and all the surface roads are gridlocked for about 10 hours a day.

Meanwhile, more and more folks are flocking to the cities:
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/0120_poverty_kneebone.aspx

Funny, but some people are always the last to know. I'm sure, back in the late 50s/early 60s there were plenty of folks who couldn't imagine the demographic change that was about to sweep the cities and make them uninhabitable for the next half century. Best of luck out there.

Yes, there's poor people in the suburbs. At what point did I deny that? I don't think most of the folks flocking to trendy neighborhoods in DC or (fill in third or fourth belt suburb) would want to live along Annandale near 236, the Route 1 corridor S of Alexandria

Yes, I notice that Metro and the interstates are gridlocked for 10 hours a day.

You're talking about a "middle class migration into the city." Unless you believe $200k/yr HHI is "middle class", that simply ain't happening, at least in any great number. (Or, show me a SFH with a lot greater than 0.1 acre zoned to Wilson and a decent elementary feeder that's under $600k. Because I suspect they don't exist.)

My point is that folks will complain about traffic. Then they'll just drive out to Arlington/Fairfax/Leesburg/Winchester/whatever you consider "sprawl." Why? Because they like their house size/lot size/neighborhood/school district. That makes the 30-45-60 minute commute worth it to them. Hell, doesn't it take 30 minutes to get from Capital Hill to upper NW during rush hour?

[Anonymous]

Arliington is inside the Beltway and part of the original District of Columbia. It is hardly an area consisting of Sprawl. In Fact, Arlington is a model in Transit Oriented Development and has managed to double its population without adding significantly to the vehicle count over the past 20 years.

And, if you look at any national trend, you will see two things:

1) people with money are staying or moving back to cities
2) the poor are slowly being marginalized to the outer suburbs, where the is little public infrastructure to support employment and commuting options.

My prediction? We will have a European type social structure (like Paris) where the poor are generally in the outer areas and those with money are in the inner areas. One can already see these changes with the real estate market issues of the past few years.

[Anonymous]

PP your theory only makes sense if you believe that the further you go the poorer the are must be. But places like Loudoun County definitely show that not to be true. They have the highest median family income in the country. People aren't moving further out just because they can't afford to live in the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arliington is inside the Beltway and part of the original District of Columbia. It is hardly an area consisting of Sprawl. In Fact, Arlington is a model in Transit Oriented Development and has managed to double its population without adding significantly to the vehicle count over the past 20 years.

And, if you look at any national trend, you will see two things:

1) people with money are staying or moving back to cities
2) the poor are slowly being marginalized to the outer suburbs, where the is little public infrastructure to support employment and commuting options.

My prediction? We will have a European type social structure (like Paris) where the poor are generally in the outer areas and those with money are in the inner areas. One can already see these changes with the real estate market issues of the past few years.

Sorry for using VA examples, but it's what I know best.

I can see South Arlington and southern parts of Falls Church really gentrifying over the next few decades.

I can't see Great Falls, McLean, northern parts of Falls Church/FCC itself, Fairfax Station, or Clifton becoming hotbeds of poverty.

I can see Sterling, Chantilly, Centreville, Lorton, Reston, and Herndon becoming worse, much worse. Not sure how much HOA's can arrest the decline but it might end up being a neighborhood-by-neighborhood thing there. We've already got Hoodbridge and Dale Sh*tty going south. Not sure how Lake Ridge holds up either.

Springfield, Vienna, and Fairfax? I don't know. I hope not (I live in Vienna), but I can see them going either way. They have fairly large lots, which will definitely immunize Great Falls, Fairfax Station, and Clifton from poverty, aren't as far out as the suburbs above, but may be too far out.

Manassas, Warrenton, Leesburg, Winchester, Front Royal, Fredericksburg? I don't know either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP your theory only makes sense if you believe that the further you go the poorer the are must be. But places like Loudoun County definitely show that not to be true. They have the highest median family income in the country. People aren't moving further out just because they can't afford to live in the city.

It's a tale of two counties there. Cashburn and points west, yeah, they want 6 BR mansions for $700k instead of $1.5mn, 5 acre lots outside of Purcellville, or are SAHM families making between $80-$150k a year. Nothing's touching Middleburg anytime soon either.

Sterling, though, may be headed downhill by Northern VA standards.

It's really a crapshoot how it will all work out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP your theory only makes sense if you believe that the further you go the poorer the are must be. But places like Loudoun County definitely show that not to be true. They have the highest median family income in the country. People aren't moving further out just because they can't afford to live in the city.

No, this is incorrect. What you'll see is the cities and streetcar suburbs (Alexandria, Arlington, etc...) continue to trend upper middle-class (and, yes, HHI of $200k is middle-class), the next ring outward will continue to add lower-income residents--which puts greater and greater pressure on services (as we've seen in PG county), and the furthest outward will remain the enclave of the wealthy (i.e. folks who don't have to commute). Your premise that folks will trade an extra 30 min of commute time for the pleasures of the suburbs reminds me of an article in the Post from several years ago, where the case of "supercommuters" from WV was outlined. These folks had recently moved to a new development in WV because they could get "more house", and only add 20 min of commuting time each way.

Of course, these folks were the *very first* residents of their large sprawling development, and were using two-lane roads through small historic towns in order to drive to work. Already these folks were talking about how the roads would need to be widened in the future, and of course, the residents of places like Middleburg conceded that that might happen--over their dead bodies. Not a chance.

So as you said, the suburbs are growing like *crazy*! You see that as some sort of success story, or an endorsement of suburban living. And I suppose it is. But that's because regional population growth is also going nuts as folks move into the area from all over the country and the world. And as you say, more often than not, they're moving into the 'burbs. Unless NoVa and MoCo get *aggressive* with smart growth and planning policies, and move away from the idiocy that they've pursued for the last 40 years, the whole edifice is going to seize up, and come grinding to a halt in a decade.

[Anonymous]

6:48 here

The PP somewhat expands on my thoughts.

Yes, places like Middleburg and the gentry areas of Loudon County will continue to be places for the wealthy.

Places like McLean, Falls Church, etc are "close-in" suburbs that are, or will be tied into either Metro, Streetcar and other options which connect suburbs to each other and the District.

I am referring to outer exurban suburbs that experienced huge boom prices where residents are dealing with foreclosures and abandoned houses. These are places that are generally tied to the metro area by highways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, this is incorrect. What you'll see is the cities and streetcar suburbs (Alexandria, Arlington, etc...) continue to trend upper middle-class (and, yes, HHI of $200k is middle-class), the next ring outward will continue to add lower-income residents--which puts greater and greater pressure on services (as we've seen in PG county), and the furthest outward will remain the enclave of the wealthy (i.e. folks who don't have to commute). Your premise that folks will trade an extra 30 min of commute time for the pleasures of the suburbs reminds me of an article in the Post from several years ago, where the case of "supercommuters" from WV was outlined. These folks had recently moved to a new development in WV because they could get "more house", and only add 20 min of commuting time each way.

Of course, these folks were the *very first* residents of their large sprawling development, and were using two-lane roads through small historic towns in order to drive to work. Already these folks were talking about how the roads would need to be widened in the future, and of course, the residents of places like Middleburg conceded that that might happen--over their dead bodies. Not a chance.

So as you said, the suburbs are growing like *crazy*! You see that as some sort of success story, or an endorsement of suburban living. And I suppose it is. But that's because regional population growth is also going nuts as folks move into the area from all over the country and the world. And as you say, more often than not, they're moving into the 'burbs. Unless NoVa and MoCo get *aggressive* with smart growth and planning policies, and move away from the idiocy that they've pursued for the last 40 years, the whole edifice is going to seize up, and come grinding to a halt in a decade.

As it stands right now, Loudoun is getting wealthy folks, given the fact that it and FFX contend for #1 spot in the "highest household incomes" rankings. So this goes against your premise that "outer suburbs will get the dregs."

Smart growth essentially means "built lots of 1000-square foot condos on top of retail and make sure to put sidewalks everywhere."

While you can create zoning to permit this to happen, you can't force families to move into those 1000-square foot condos.

My contention is that attachment to SFH living, a desire for (perceived) good schools, and a want for larger houses will continue to fuel some degree of outer suburb/exurb growth -- and people won't really mind the traffic.

Or, at least, they won't mind it until gas hits $10 a gallon. Then, and only then, would you see the shift you describe happening. I'd suspect that even then, folks would rather carpool than give up their 3000 square foot houses.

But yes, some of the outer suburbs will get slammed as I describe earlier.

[Anonymous]

My contention is that attachment to SFH living, a desire for (perceived) good schools, and a want for larger houses will continue to fuel some degree of outer suburb/exurb growth -- and people won't really mind the traffic. Or, at least, they won't mind it until gas hits $10 a gallon. Then, and only then, would you see the shift you describe happening. I'd suspect that even then, folks would rather carpool than give up their 3000 square foot houses.

The reason DCPS and some of the streetcar suburbs in VA lack "good schools" is purely a function of demographics. The influx of middle-class families driven by congestion, shifting tastes, and improved city services will change that.

There's no single factor that precipitates the shift. Gas prices going to $10 / gallon may do it in the current commuting environment. But what's the price-point if average commute times rise 20%? $8 / gal? $6?

You say, "people won't really mind the traffic", but congestion doesn't grow in a linear fashion based on population growth, and it's clear that some folks have already sacrificed square footage for a shorter commute.

Smart growth essentially means "built lots of 1000-square foot condos on top of retail and make sure to put sidewalks everywhere." While you can create zoning to permit this to happen, you can't force families to move into those 1000-square foot condos.

Obviously, not everyone wants to live in a 1000 sq ft condo, but the existence of Del Ray, Capitol Hill, Brookland, Clarendon, Bethesda, etc, etc... serve as counterexamples to your claim.

One last thought: as PPs noted above, not every neighborhood in the suburbs is going to be a sea of poverty, but overwhelmingly the poor will live in the suburbs. Just as not every neighborhood in DC has huge number of poor residents, but the economic effects of taking care of the poor still falls to them--as it should be. Same will be true for the suburbs.