The DMV needs a YIMBY revolution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why are we having this conversation?

Stop engaging with YIMBY lunatics like they're serious people. Most are too young and inexperienced to understand what they're asking.

With so much time increasingly spent online, I hope there's a push for an online credential system. The buzzing of these flies around these made up issues is distracting our nation from solving more important problems.

As fun as it is to argue, you are likely right.

First, it legitimizes their “arguments.” You shouldn’t bother for the same reasons that you shouldn’t engage flat Earthers or antivaxxers. They simply should not be provided with any additional platforms.

Second, the time would be much better spent engaging with your government representatives, your HOA or community associations, and your neighbors. Get organized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

They can build a 2-4 unit building that looks just like a single family new construction. Obviously there would be more people but the look of the neighborhood doesn't have to change much.

It's like the rowhouses neighborhoods in DC. The 2-4 unit rowhouses look exactly the same as single family rowhouses.

I don’t actually have an issue with this with the exception that when it comes to issues related to insufficient parking, overcrowded schools, infrastructure, etc. that follow from these changes, the local governments always stick their head in the sand and pretend like they had no idea those issues would crop up.

Let's talk about that. When you say "insufficient parking", specifically what kinds of problems do you expect? People will park their cars where you want to park your car? People will double park and box in your car? People will park their cars on the street in front of your house? People will come to blows over parking spaces? Or what?

Do you actually live in this area and own a car? Because if you do then you already know.

What ends up happening is people park their cars on both sides of the street and block traffic. Then emergency vehicles cannot access the street and someone dies in a house fire because the fire truck cannot reach a burning building. Same thing for a ambulances, bad urban planning increases the risk that Grandma dies from a heart attack because insufficient parking creates obstacles to accessing her house. YIMBYs want to upzone everything and ignore the real-world consequences of their magical beliefs. There is real harm created by just allowing people to build whatever they want without consideration for infrastructure capacity.

Parking enforcement is the solution to the problem of illegal parking.

Well until theses localities actually decide to crack down on parking enforcement, that is a moot point. Most of these places have no interest in do that.

Really? It seems like, if illegally parked vehicles delayed emergency response and then someone died in a house fire or of a heart attack, that actually would be an incentive to conduct parking enforcement.

In fact, it's a lot more rational than the idea that a locality shouldn't allow more types of housing because nothing can be done about people parking cars illegally on the street.

But as we’ve established, it’s not *just* about illegal parking.

Right, it's not just about illegal parking on the street, it's also about current homeowners of single-family houses who believe that a locality shouldn't allow more types of housing because then it might become more difficult for them to park on the street.

Which does raise the question: why aren't those homeowners parking their cars on their property, instead of on public property? Weren't there on-site parking requirements for the developers who built those houses?

I see you can’t read very well, because I addressed your first point in the comment just before the illegal parking one, and it’s more than just “it might become more difficult.”

As to your second point, that would be ideal but the stupid YIMBYs keep getting rid of the on-site parking requirements because they hate cars almost as much as they hate SFH and are also simps for developers who don’t want to provide parking.

Obviously the SFHs should have on-site parking requirements! If they don't, that should be changed. Then the SFH homeowners can park their cars on their private property, and they won't have to worry about the availability of street parking.

Arlington has strict requirements on lot coverage and storm water management. You are limited to how much of the yard can be covered with impervious surfaces. If you build more parking, you can build fewer housing units. Say if you build three townhouses, you have three driveways. This leaves no space to park in front of the townhouses because of the curb cuts.
So what had once been off street parking is now restricted only to the owners of the townhouses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

They can build a 2-4 unit building that looks just like a single family new construction. Obviously there would be more people but the look of the neighborhood doesn't have to change much.

It's like the rowhouses neighborhoods in DC. The 2-4 unit rowhouses look exactly the same as single family rowhouses.

I don’t actually have an issue with this with the exception that when it comes to issues related to insufficient parking, overcrowded schools, infrastructure, etc. that follow from these changes, the local governments always stick their head in the sand and pretend like they had no idea those issues would crop up.

Let's talk about that. When you say "insufficient parking", specifically what kinds of problems do you expect? People will park their cars where you want to park your car? People will double park and box in your car? People will park their cars on the street in front of your house? People will come to blows over parking spaces? Or what?

Do you actually live in this area and own a car? Because if you do then you already know.

What ends up happening is people park their cars on both sides of the street and block traffic. Then emergency vehicles cannot access the street and someone dies in a house fire because the fire truck cannot reach a burning building. Same thing for a ambulances, bad urban planning increases the risk that Grandma dies from a heart attack because insufficient parking creates obstacles to accessing her house. YIMBYs want to upzone everything and ignore the real-world consequences of their magical beliefs. There is real harm created by just allowing people to build whatever they want without consideration for infrastructure capacity.

Seems like a better solution for that problem would be downsizing for cars. Sick of those giant cars not fitting in parking spaces too.

Not sending a Hook-and-Ladder to deal with grandma's heart attack would also help. A van based ambulance could get into a lot of spaces large firetrucks can't

We’re so lucky that the YIMBYs know how to efficiently staff an effective fire protection service. It would be great to have purpose-built apparatus for every emergency and the people to staff them but local governments can’t afford that, in part because the YIMBYs have hollowed out the tax base through laws that exempt some of the new development from property taxes.

(They send the ladder truck because the paramedic has two jobs. One is on the ladder truck and the other is being a paramedic. The apparatus goes with the paramedic because otherwise it would have to go out of service for insufficient staffing every time your van-based ambulance took the paramedic somewhere else).

A voice of knowledge in the wilderness of ignorance. Let me also add that the YIMBYs try to tell the Fire Marshalls how to do their jobs, by mis-understanding reasonable rules for accessibity to basement units, stairwell egress and exits in multi-unit buildings, and for firetruck accessibility through narrow car-lined streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

They can build a 2-4 unit building that looks just like a single family new construction. Obviously there would be more people but the look of the neighborhood doesn't have to change much.

It's like the rowhouses neighborhoods in DC. The 2-4 unit rowhouses look exactly the same as single family rowhouses.

I don’t actually have an issue with this with the exception that when it comes to issues related to insufficient parking, overcrowded schools, infrastructure, etc. that follow from these changes, the local governments always stick their head in the sand and pretend like they had no idea those issues would crop up.

Let's talk about that. When you say "insufficient parking", specifically what kinds of problems do you expect? People will park their cars where you want to park your car? People will double park and box in your car? People will park their cars on the street in front of your house? People will come to blows over parking spaces? Or what?

Do you actually live in this area and own a car? Because if you do then you already know.

What ends up happening is people park their cars on both sides of the street and block traffic. Then emergency vehicles cannot access the street and someone dies in a house fire because the fire truck cannot reach a burning building. Same thing for a ambulances, bad urban planning increases the risk that Grandma dies from a heart attack because insufficient parking creates obstacles to accessing her house. YIMBYs want to upzone everything and ignore the real-world consequences of their magical beliefs. There is real harm created by just allowing people to build whatever they want without consideration for infrastructure capacity.

Seems like a better solution for that problem would be downsizing for cars. Sick of those giant cars not fitting in parking spaces too.

Not sending a Hook-and-Ladder to deal with grandma's heart attack would also help. A van based ambulance could get into a lot of spaces large firetrucks can't

We’re so lucky that the YIMBYs know how to efficiently staff an effective fire protection service. It would be great to have purpose-built apparatus for every emergency and the people to staff them but local governments can’t afford that, in part because the YIMBYs have hollowed out the tax base through laws that exempt some of the new development from property taxes.

(They send the ladder truck because the paramedic has two jobs. One is on the ladder truck and the other is being a paramedic. The apparatus goes with the paramedic because otherwise it would have to go out of service for insufficient staffing every time your van-based ambulance took the paramedic somewhere else).

You're explaining why they do it. You're also explaining why it's vastly inefficient just in terms of emergency response.

I also explained why they had to choose the cheaper but less efficient option. Landlords need to pay taxes. I know that’s an unpopular position in YIMBYland but you can’t have nice things without revenue.

You do realize this has nothing to do with revenue right? you could raise all the property tax you want, and they would still send fire trucks to deal with medical emergencies. Its not like this in other countries btw.

In most countries, the heart attack victim is allowed to die. Socialized medicine or no health care at all is more the norm in most countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

As a Del Ray resident, I can confirm that the YIMBYs are circling this neighborhood like vultures.

The head of NoVa YIMBYs lives in DelRay and describes himself as a refugee from Arlington. And by that he means that the DelRay schools suck and he want to get a $500K duplex in a top school district in Arlington. One of the other leaders lives in a luxury rental building in North Arlington after moving from Crystal City. For the one year she had her kid in a South Arlington school she waxed eloquent about the diversity of the school as the YIMBY ideal and then --- boom -- she is in one of the best school districts in North Arlington.

How does one become head of NoVa YIMBYs? Is NoVa YIMBYs a group with by-laws and board elections? Or did you just decide that this person is the head?

That person describes himself as the head of NoVa YIMBYs. I do not know their governing structure, but you can join their Facebook page and message the head of NoVa YIMBYs for
details. Are you thinking of unseating him?

"NoVa YIMBYs" is a Facebook group? I thought you were talking about actual people (i.e., YIMBYs who live in Northern Virginia), not a Facebook group. Anybody can be anything on Facebook.

Nah, NoVa YIMBYs is an organization that runs its own Facebook group. But you may be too purposely obtuse to join in and get the answer to the questions that have been posed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

They can build a 2-4 unit building that looks just like a single family new construction. Obviously there would be more people but the look of the neighborhood doesn't have to change much.

It's like the rowhouses neighborhoods in DC. The 2-4 unit rowhouses look exactly the same as single family rowhouses.

I don’t actually have an issue with this with the exception that when it comes to issues related to insufficient parking, overcrowded schools, infrastructure, etc. that follow from these changes, the local governments always stick their head in the sand and pretend like they had no idea those issues would crop up.

Let's talk about that. When you say "insufficient parking", specifically what kinds of problems do you expect? People will park their cars where you want to park your car? People will double park and box in your car? People will park their cars on the street in front of your house? People will come to blows over parking spaces? Or what?

Do you actually live in this area and own a car? Because if you do then you already know.

What ends up happening is people park their cars on both sides of the street and block traffic. Then emergency vehicles cannot access the street and someone dies in a house fire because the fire truck cannot reach a burning building. Same thing for a ambulances, bad urban planning increases the risk that Grandma dies from a heart attack because insufficient parking creates obstacles to accessing her house. YIMBYs want to upzone everything and ignore the real-world consequences of their magical beliefs. There is real harm created by just allowing people to build whatever they want without consideration for infrastructure capacity.

Seems like a better solution for that problem would be downsizing for cars. Sick of those giant cars not fitting in parking spaces too.

Not sending a Hook-and-Ladder to deal with grandma's heart attack would also help. A van based ambulance could get into a lot of spaces large firetrucks can't

We’re so lucky that the YIMBYs know how to efficiently staff an effective fire protection service. It would be great to have purpose-built apparatus for every emergency and the people to staff them but local governments can’t afford that, in part because the YIMBYs have hollowed out the tax base through laws that exempt some of the new development from property taxes.

(They send the ladder truck because the paramedic has two jobs. One is on the ladder truck and the other is being a paramedic. The apparatus goes with the paramedic because otherwise it would have to go out of service for insufficient staffing every time your van-based ambulance took the paramedic somewhere else).

You're explaining why they do it. You're also explaining why it's vastly inefficient just in terms of emergency response.

I also explained why they had to choose the cheaper but less efficient option. Landlords need to pay taxes. I know that’s an unpopular position in YIMBYland but you can’t have nice things without revenue.

You do realize this has nothing to do with revenue right? you could raise all the property tax you want, and they would still send fire trucks to deal with medical emergencies. Its not like this in other countries btw.

In most countries, the heart attack victim is allowed to die. Socialized medicine or no health care at all is more the norm in most countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

As a Del Ray resident, I can confirm that the YIMBYs are circling this neighborhood like vultures.

The head of NoVa YIMBYs lives in DelRay and describes himself as a refugee from Arlington. And by that he means that the DelRay schools suck and he want to get a $500K duplex in a top school district in Arlington. One of the other leaders lives in a luxury rental building in North Arlington after moving from Crystal City. For the one year she had her kid in a South Arlington school she waxed eloquent about the diversity of the school as the YIMBY ideal and then --- boom -- she is in one of the best school districts in North Arlington.

How does one become head of NoVa YIMBYs? Is NoVa YIMBYs a group with by-laws and board elections? Or did you just decide that this person is the head?

That person describes himself as the head of NoVa YIMBYs. I do not know their governing structure, but you can join their Facebook page and message the head of NoVa YIMBYs for
details. Are you thinking of unseating him?

"NoVa YIMBYs" is a Facebook group? I thought you were talking about actual people (i.e., YIMBYs who live in Northern Virginia), not a Facebook group. Anybody can be anything on Facebook.

Nah, NoVa YIMBYs is an organization that runs its own Facebook group. But you may be too purposely obtuse to join in and get the answer to the questions that have been posed.

Oh look, there they are: https://www.yimbysofnova.org/

The group doesn't have a head, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does Chevy Chase DC have to become like NoMa or the Navy Yard? Isn’t having a variety of neighborhoods with different characteristics like height and density, versus semi-suburban, a good thing?

Isn't having a variety of housing types in a neighborhood, versus exclusively one housing type, a good thing?

Why should lower density village type neighborhoods also have 12-13 story buildings? DC has a diversity of housing types across the city, which is desirable. It doesn’t mean that Palisades or AU Park have to be Mini-me versions of the Navy Yard.

Why shouldn't they?

Not that anyone is proposing to build 12-13 story buildings in Palisades.

How oddly specific. Are they are only proposing 10-11 story buildings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does Chevy Chase DC have to become like NoMa or the Navy Yard? Isn’t having a variety of neighborhoods with different characteristics like height and density, versus semi-suburban, a good thing?

Isn't having a variety of housing types in a neighborhood, versus exclusively one housing type, a good thing?

Why should lower density village type neighborhoods also have 12-13 story buildings?

DC has a diversity of housing types across the city, which is desirable. It doesn’t mean that Palisades or AU Park have to be Mini-me versions of the Navy Yard.

Why shouldn't they?

Not that anyone is proposing to build 12-13 story buildings in Palisades.

How oddly specific. Are they are only proposing 10-11 story buildings?

Discuss this with the PP who asked

Why should lower density village type neighborhoods also have 12-13 story buildings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

They can build a 2-4 unit building that looks just like a single family new construction. Obviously there would be more people but the look of the neighborhood doesn't have to change much.

It's like the rowhouses neighborhoods in DC. The 2-4 unit rowhouses look exactly the same as single family rowhouses.

I don’t actually have an issue with this with the exception that when it comes to issues related to insufficient parking, overcrowded schools, infrastructure, etc. that follow from these changes, the local governments always stick their head in the sand and pretend like they had no idea those issues would crop up.

Let's talk about that. When you say "insufficient parking", specifically what kinds of problems do you expect? People will park their cars where you want to park your car? People will double park and box in your car? People will park their cars on the street in front of your house? People will come to blows over parking spaces? Or what?

Do you actually live in this area and own a car? Because if you do then you already know.

What ends up happening is people park their cars on both sides of the street and block traffic. Then emergency vehicles cannot access the street and someone dies in a house fire because the fire truck cannot reach a burning building. Same thing for a ambulances, bad urban planning increases the risk that Grandma dies from a heart attack because insufficient parking creates obstacles to accessing her house. YIMBYs want to upzone everything and ignore the real-world consequences of their magical beliefs. There is real harm created by just allowing people to build whatever they want without consideration for infrastructure capacity.

Seems like a better solution for that problem would be downsizing for cars. Sick of those giant cars not fitting in parking spaces too.

Not sending a Hook-and-Ladder to deal with grandma's heart attack would also help. A van based ambulance could get into a lot of spaces large firetrucks can't

We’re so lucky that the YIMBYs know how to efficiently staff an effective fire protection service. It would be great to have purpose-built apparatus for every emergency and the people to staff them but local governments can’t afford that, in part because the YIMBYs have hollowed out the tax base through laws that exempt some of the new development from property taxes.

(They send the ladder truck because the paramedic has two jobs. One is on the ladder truck and the other is being a paramedic. The apparatus goes with the paramedic because otherwise it would have to go out of service for insufficient staffing every time your van-based ambulance took the paramedic somewhere else).

You're explaining why they do it. You're also explaining why it's vastly inefficient just in terms of emergency response.

I also explained why they had to choose the cheaper but less efficient option. Landlords need to pay taxes. I know that’s an unpopular position in YIMBYland but you can’t have nice things without revenue.

You do realize this has nothing to do with revenue right? you could raise all the property tax you want, and they would still send fire trucks to deal with medical emergencies. Its not like this in other countries btw.

In most countries, the heart attack victim is allowed to die. Socialized medicine or no health care at all is more the norm in most countries.

Yet it’s not the norm in this country, the country we live in and are discussing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Your taxes are the only way they’ll fund all of the services they want but can’t afford.

YIMBYs are the result of society giving an entire generation trophies for losing.

This. Young and stupid. At least when we were young and stupid we didn't have a voice. They have one now are trying to ruin the country. Grow up or move to another country more to your liking, OP.

DP. Since this is happening, maybe you're the one who will need to accept it or move to another country to more to your liking?

It is people like you who will cause an insane person like Tr*mp to get elected. The majority of the US doesn't believe in your ultra-progressive causes. You even turn off those of use who want progress. You push too hard too fast and the cause breaks and you lose ground.

+1,000,000

This all actually is Trump's fault. He was and is so awful that progressives were able to take over the Democractic party, while all the Democratic party has to do is say Trump is awful to win. They do not have to run on substance. The progressive stances are not coming to light.
But actually, Trump won because neither party would address immigration, one of the most if not the most important issue to Americans. So the horribleness is circular.

The Democrats have pushed comprehensive immigration reform for decades. It's Trump who has blocked it and refused to do anything on immigration.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/25/politics/gop-senators-angry-trump-immigration-deal/index.html

And as if Obama didn't push Progressive policies... like forcing mixed zoning through regulation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

As a Del Ray resident, I can confirm that the YIMBYs are circling this neighborhood like vultures.

The head of NoVa YIMBYs lives in DelRay and describes himself as a refugee from Arlington. And by that he means that the DelRay schools suck and he want to get a $500K duplex in a top school district in Arlington. One of the other leaders lives in a luxury rental building in North Arlington after moving from Crystal City. For the one year she had her kid in a South Arlington school she waxed eloquent about the diversity of the school as the YIMBY ideal and then --- boom -- she is in one of the best school districts in North Arlington.

How does one become head of NoVa YIMBYs? Is NoVa YIMBYs a group with by-laws and board elections? Or did you just decide that this person is the head?

That person describes himself as the head of NoVa YIMBYs. I do not know their governing structure, but you can join their Facebook page and message the head of NoVa YIMBYs for
details. Are you thinking of unseating him?

"NoVa YIMBYs" is a Facebook group? I thought you were talking about actual people (i.e., YIMBYs who live in Northern Virginia), not a Facebook group. Anybody can be anything on Facebook.

Nah, NoVa YIMBYs is an organization that runs its own Facebook group. But you may be too purposely obtuse to join in and get the answer to the questions that have been posed.

Oh look, there they are: https://www.yimbysofnova.org/

The group doesn't have a head, though.

Stop it you two! There is a dude named Luca Gattoni-Celli who claims to be the founder and head of NOVA YIMBYs. I have seen him in Arl Co board meetings and that's how he introduces himself. His sidekick is someone named Jane who is always at the meetings with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is why are we having this conversation?

Stop engaging with YIMBY lunatics like they're serious people. Most are too young and inexperienced to understand what they're asking.

With so much time increasingly spent online, I hope there's a push for an online credential system. The buzzing of these flies around these made up issues is distracting our nation from solving more important problems.

As fun as it is to argue, you are likely right.

First, it legitimizes their “arguments.” You shouldn’t bother for the same reasons that you shouldn’t engage flat Earthers or antivaxxers. They simply should not be provided with any additional platforms.

Second, the time would be much better spent engaging with your government representatives, your HOA or community associations, and your neighbors. Get organized.

+1 Preach!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

I wrote that post, and I do indeed own my home. I love it, and don't envy and resent others for owning their homes. I just don't think they should tell others what kind of home they are allowed to build.

By your logic, why shouldn’t I be able to open a junkyard, a hotel, an automotive shop, a dog kennel, or a restaurant next door to you? Why should you tell me what to do with my property? So either you want zoning laws or you don’t. You don’t get to decide what zoning laws (particularly ones that have been in place for years) are.

You're comparing housing to junkyards, hotels, automotive shops, dog kennels, and restaurants. Why? I suppose I'm grateful that you didn't compare housing to toxic waste dumps and industrial waste incinerators.

Of course I don't get to decide what zoning laws are, because I am not on the city council or county council or whatever. However, the city council or county council or whatever does get to decide what zoning laws are.

And if I own the property next to you, then I get to put in a homeless shelter next door.

Exactly. The person talking about “letting you do whatever you want with your own property” keeps moving the goal lines. Existing zoning laws are BAD!!!! Build more duplexes, because we think you should and we don’t care what homeowners think! Everyone has to live in high density areas, because it’s what I want! Then when you talk about giving people the freedom to do what they want with their property it’s all gaslighting talking about how you didn’t compare multi family housing to toxic waste dumps. But not addressing the fact that there will always be zoning laws that prohibit certain things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

I wrote that post, and I do indeed own my home. I love it, and don't envy and resent others for owning their homes. I just don't think they should tell others what kind of home they are allowed to build.

By your logic, why shouldn’t I be able to open a junkyard, a hotel, an automotive shop, a dog kennel, or a restaurant next door to you? Why should you tell me what to do with my property? So either you want zoning laws or you don’t. You don’t get to decide what zoning laws (particularly ones that have been in place for years) are.

You're comparing housing to junkyards, hotels, automotive shops, dog kennels, and restaurants. Why? I suppose I'm grateful that you didn't compare housing to toxic waste dumps and industrial waste incinerators.

Of course I don't get to decide what zoning laws are, because I am not on the city council or county council or whatever. However, the city council or county council or whatever does get to decide what zoning laws are.

And if I own the property next to you, then I get to put in a homeless shelter next door.

Exactly. The person talking about “letting you do whatever you want with your own property” keeps moving the goal lines. Existing zoning laws are BAD!!!! Build more duplexes, because we think you should and we don’t care what homeowners think! Everyone has to live in high density areas, because it’s what I want! Then when you talk about giving people the freedom to do what they want with their property it’s all gaslighting talking about how you didn’t compare multi family housing to toxic waste dumps. But not addressing the fact that there will always be zoning laws that prohibit certain things.

I haven’t read this whole thread and I’m certainly not going to defend some internet comments I haven’t even read but I think most yimbys would support zoning laws— there just is some disagreement over whether to allow multifamily housing.

It’s kind of silly to assume if you support 2 families living in a 6,000 sq ft home that therefor you support abolition of zoning.