Project looming in our neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Sprawl: Why would Lyon Village care whether people wind up settling in Falls Church, Vienna, or Manassas? Don't the residents of Lyon Village have responsibility for making the best decisions for, well, Lyon Village?"

Interesting posts. I feel obliged to agree that the residents of Lyon Village should indeed make their decisions with their own interests in mind... but it sounds like OP is concerned about decisions being made beyond the boundaries his/her "merrie" suburban enclave. Planners working for the best interests of cities and counties as a whole are profoundly influenced by current "new urbanist" ideas and believe (I think correctly) that low-density development in metropolitan areas should be put to rest with the dodos. Argue if you wish, but this is an issue much bigger than Lyon Village or any other too-precious hamlet for ideological throwbacks to the mid-late 20th century.

I'm not anti NIMBY-ism in particular, because people should try to shape their communities to their preferences, but OP's preferences belong to a time that has passed and reveal him/her to be a bit of a dodo... and this one is simply out of his hands.

Yes, our betters are going to force us into a higher-density lifestyle, whether we want it or not. Those of you who don't want this outcome had better start fighting now, because the train is pulling out of the station.

Indeed. Think of it as social Brussels sprouts-- we simply know better. You're welcome to carve out a low-density lifestyle farther from the city, where that sort of thing belongs.

Heh, that was just a shade too heavy-handed and you tipped your hand as a satirist. ;-p

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, our betters are going to force us into a higher-density lifestyle, whether we want it or not. Those of you who don't want this outcome had better start fighting now, because the train is pulling out of the station.

Well, actually, it's about allowing private property owners to maximize the value of their private property without meddling from socialistic NIMBYs who think they know best.

If a land owner has land and wants to build a ten-story apartment complex, what right do you have to tell them they can't? You people are worse than Stalin!

You mean you wouldn't move heaven and earth to try to stop the project if you were the next-door neighbor of that proposed apartment complex? I find that hard to believe.

Well... I just might. But I doubt I'd have the balls to do that while positioning myself as some sort of Galtian hero of the libertarian movement, defending personal choice. 'Cause that would be really embarrassing. And I'd end up sounding something like this:

Yes, our betters are going to force us into a higher-density lifestyle, whether we want it or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, our betters are going to force us into a higher-density lifestyle, whether we want it or not. Those of you who don't want this outcome had better start fighting now, because the train is pulling out of the station.

Well, actually, it's about allowing private property owners to maximize the value of their private property without meddling from socialistic NIMBYs who think they know best.

If a land owner has land and wants to build a ten-story apartment complex, what right do you have to tell them they can't? You people are worse than Stalin!

You mean you wouldn't move heaven and earth to try to stop the project if you were the next-door neighbor of that proposed apartment complex? I find that hard to believe.

Well... I just might. But I doubt I'd have the balls to do that while positioning myself as some sort of Galtian hero of the libertarian movement, defending personal choice. 'Cause that would be really embarrassing. And I'd end up sounding something like this:

Yes, our betters are going to force us into a higher-density lifestyle, whether we want it or not.

Whoa, project much? ;-p I'm hardly a libertarian, and think Ayn Rand was an idiot and a crappy writer to boot. But if you think I am inaccurately portraying the way a lot of New Urbanist/transit-loving types actually think, you aren't paying attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One other point, I just to get agitated about NIMBY opposition to projects. But now it has become clear to me that the people who make zoning and project siting decisions always seem to make sure that nothing bad goes into *their* backyards, so now I'm much more sympathetic.

Well, you would certainly think so (see Fenty, Adrian, swimming pool). But nooo, not in precious little Arlington County. Would you believe one of the County Board members actually lives in Lyon Village. Yes, that's right she lives there! And yet she was the most vociferous supporter of this invasion.

Don't believe me? See the article entitled "Millions More from County for Project Opposed by Lyon Village Citizens Association"!!!

The First Baptist Church of Clarendon and its development affiliate, The Views at Clarendon, are seeking an additional 6.5 million dollars of AHIF funds from the County, for a total of $13 million in AHIF funds...Barbara Favola has been a constant supporter of the Baptist Church project and lives right here in the village. Let’s see if we can get our neighbors to support one-another in fighting this poor use of affordable housing funds.

You know, you work and work and work. You find someone from your own neighborhood elected to the County Board. You put out the arguments that there will only be "several" floors of affordable housing, understanding that these projects collapse when you don't have market-rate units subsidizing the affordable ones. You file lawsuits that delay the process by years, so that a $6.5 million infusion is needed.

You do everything you're supposed to do, everything the right way, and then your own neighbor votes to allow this kind of housing in your own neighborhood!!! I don't know about you, but I would be simply apoplectic at such a choice. I just don't understand what this world is coming to, when you can't rely on your own neighbor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You do everything you're supposed to do, everything the right way, and then your own neighbor votes to allow this kind of housing in your own neighborhood!!! I don't know about you, but I would be simply apoplectic at such a choice. I just don't understand what this world is coming to, when you can't rely on your own neighbor.

The dangers of living in a community where too many people actually believe that stuff, I suppose. Next time move to McLean or Potomac lol.

[Anonymous]

But if you think I am inaccurately portraying the way a lot of New Urbanist/transit-loving types actually think, you aren't paying attention.

I don't care about what your particular imagined New Urbanist boogey-man transit-lover "actually thinks". I'm just saying that if you want to make an argument that "the elites [who?] want to tell us how to live" it would be a bit less transparently ludicrous if you left out the Personal Freedom angle.

Especially if "how you want to live" hinges so clearly on using the courts to prevent private property owners from realizing market value of their properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But if you think I am inaccurately portraying the way a lot of New Urbanist/transit-loving types actually think, you aren't paying attention.

I don't care about what your particular imagined New Urbanist boogey-man transit-lover "actually thinks". I'm just saying that if you want to make an argument that "the elites [who?] want to tell us how to live" it would be a bit less transparently ludicrous if you left out the Personal Freedom angle.

Especially if "how you want to live" hinges so clearly on using the courts to prevent private property owners from realizing market value of their properties.

Hey, man, don't hate the player, hate the game. We already live in a world filled with restrictions on development and ways to kill projects via litigation, I'm just saying that it is hard to blame people for taking full advantage of the remedies available to them given that reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey, man, don't hate the player, hate the game. We already live in a world filled with restrictions on development and ways to kill projects via litigation, I'm just saying that it is hard to blame people for taking full advantage of the remedies available to them given that reality.

Hey, no sweat: I've got no problem with people following their rational self-interest. Everybody's got the right to do what they can, regardless how damaging to the society as a whole. Just a problem with folks waving the bloody shirt against "The Elites" while defending their lily-white upper-class fiefdoms. Just pointing out that the idea that exurban sprawl is some sort of magical free-market outcome is a pretty offensive delusion.

The free-market looks like Manhattan, not Reston Town Center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Hey, man, don't hate the player, hate the game. We already live in a world filled with restrictions on development and ways to kill projects via litigation, I'm just saying that it is hard to blame people for taking full advantage of the remedies available to them given that reality.

Exactly. I'm a real estate investor and am forced to set aside a few units in one of my buildings as "affordable" housing. I'd love to just build a plaza or something, but every so often politics get involved and you have to include these units as part of your "bonus density". The last thing you want is for these people to stick out, as it brings down everyone's property value. If these people have some sort of credibility as tenants, such that you can't tell whether they're getting a reduced rate, then you're not driving off the tenants who keep you in business.

Anyway, these two grad students moved out in December because one of the Dads got them a gig skiing in Banff or someplace over the holiday break. Before I could arrange a new placement, the County sent over this family with a housing voucher. Now, that's tricky because you're supposed to treat the voucher like cash, so you can't just harsh on them over lack of income.

So Jose and Maria come in and I'm thinking, this isn't good. These two obviously don't fit my building's profile. Plus, Maria's 8+ months along and I can't figure out why on Earth they're looking around now. Well, they tell this sob story about how their building is being converted to condos (even in this economy) and how they've been rejected place after place. As if that's MY problem. Then they tell me that the doctor told them they're having a boy, and they just want little Heysus or Jesse or whatever to have a stable home in which to live. Again, as if that's my problem.

Long story short, I told them I already had someone who had just come by an hour before--friends of the people who moved out. I sent Jose et al on their way, and then called up the grad students and told them I'd forgive their lost rent if they hooked me up pronto. They sent over a couple of pals, and I got them moved in. So it all worked out--but certainly no thanks to this uppity local government getting in my business.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:So Jose and Maria come in and I'm thinking, this isn't good.

Dude, anyone who decides to troll DCUM under the name "Orlando" doesn't need to be making ethnically charged suggestions involving names (especially when one of those names in my wife's).

I've been watching your sock puppeting to see where it will go, but now I think it's time to stop.

Anyone who wants to know more about "Orlando" and his battle against "the wrong kind of people" can feel free to visit http://askthecounty.com/

However, given the content of his posts, it's also possible that "Orlando" actually supports the new development and is simply trying to make the opponents look bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I got cut off. As far as firefighters, they actually get to live inside a firehouse. I know this because I take my children there regularly to visit. They always ask me why the firefighters get to live in such a cool house and eat sloppy joes every day. I tell them that rent-free housing and meals are one of the perks that comes from being a public employee.

Uh, the firefighters don't live in the firehouse. They typically are on long shifts, so firehouses are house-like because they do need to sleep and eat there while they're on call. They also have families and homes.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Uh, the firefighters don't live in the firehouse. They typically are on long shifts, so firehouses are house-like because they do need to sleep and eat there while they're on call. They also have families and homes.

Please don't feed the troll.

[Anonymous]

Troll-ando was funny up to the Little Condo of Bethlehem. Lemme guess, a kid with a white plastic container came from Verizon Center to drop some gogo beats.

Fun while it lasted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey, man, don't hate the player, hate the game. We already live in a world filled with restrictions on development and ways to kill projects via litigation, I'm just saying that it is hard to blame people for taking full advantage of the remedies available to them given that reality.

Hey, no sweat: I've got no problem with people following their rational self-interest. Everybody's got the right to do what they can, regardless how damaging to the society as a whole. Just a problem with folks waving the bloody shirt against "The Elites" while defending their lily-white upper-class fiefdoms. Just pointing out that the idea that exurban sprawl is some sort of magical free-market outcome is a pretty offensive delusion.

The free-market looks like Manhattan, not Reston Town Center.

Manhattan real estate development is the free market at work? Wild, now I've heard everything.