The Urbanist Cult

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

Because "single dudes" in their 30s are grown ups? So they buy properties and places to live?

When I was single, and also when I was in my 30s and married, I would never have wanted to live in Tenleytown. It's really only appealing if you have school-aged kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

“I want my neighborhood to be economically less desirable”

More like "I recognize that adding affordable housing and making my neighborhood denser will not hurt existing homeowners at all but will help people move there who can't now."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Increasing density doesn't necessarily push housing prices down. It can. But it can also push them up. It depends on the situation.

Look at Navy Yard. It's far more densely populated than it was ten years ago. But it's also far more expensive than it used to be. That's because all those condos and apartments create a lot of potential customers for businesses so lots of restaurants and bars move in, which makes the area more attractive to some people (read: young people), which creates a lot more demand for housing, which pushes housing prices up (15 years ago, not many people wanted to live in Navy Yard).

Now, if you moved all the condos and apartments in Navy Yard to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, housing prices there would crash because there wouldn't be enough people to fill them.

Navy Yard is not a particularly useful example for comparison -- it was barely a residential neighborhood at all before the current housing boom. The housing prices didn't go up because restaurants and bars moved in, they went up because it went from virtually no residential units at all to only high-end ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

“I want my neighborhood to be economically less desirable”

Why would a few affordable housing units make a neighborhood less desirable?

So you only want a few low income neighbors? What’s your limit? Why do you have a limit? What’s wrong with living near low income people that you don’t want to live near too many of them?

Still not seeing a response here. It’s interesting that the “more neighbors” crowd want to quota poor people in their own neighborhoods. Can’t have too many, right? It’s what IZ is all about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

Because "single dudes" in their 30s are grown ups? So they buy properties and places to live?

When I was single, and also when I was in my 30s and married, I would never have wanted to live in Tenleytown. It's really only appealing if you have school-aged kids.

So your goal is to make it less family friendly because there are too many family friendly neighborhoods in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

Because "single dudes" in their 30s are grown ups? So they buy properties and places to live?

When I was single, and also when I was in my 30s and married, I would never have wanted to live in Tenleytown. It's really only appealing if you have school-aged kids.

So your goal is to make it less family friendly because there are too many family friendly neighborhoods in DC?

]

How would adding apartments suitable for families make it less family friendly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

“I want my neighborhood to be economically less desirable”

Why would a few affordable housing units make a neighborhood less desirable?

So you only want a few low income neighbors? What’s your limit? Why do you have a limit? What’s wrong with living near low income people that you don’t want to live near too many of them?

Still not seeing a response here. It’s interesting that the “more neighbors” crowd want to quota poor people in their own neighborhoods. Can’t have too many, right? It’s what IZ is all about.

I'm not the PP who you were responding to, but I think you're the only one who suggested anything about a quota. I'd be fine with any amount of affordable housing units in my neighborhood -- it's extremely unlikely that there will be the money or political will to add enough units to make me feel that the neighborhood has substantially changed enough for me to dislike it here (that would probably require converting something like 50 percent of the single-family houses to large apartment buildings, which isn't ever happening). Any amount of affordable housing in Tenleytown would be a significant improvement. Just because no one decided to argue your weird rhetorical point doesn't mean the "'more neighbors crowd'" wants to limit poor people nearby, it mostly means no one wants to engage with a ridiculous bad-faith reading of what the PP posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the US becomes a socialist or communist nation, there will be huge differences in housing opportunity. That's how capitalism works.

The smart growth crowd could also be accused of racism. The kind of affordable housing they talk about is available in other sections of the city. But they want to live in Tenleytown and Friendship Heights. I wonder why.

I agree with "the smart growth crowd," and I live in Tenleytown in a house I own. I want more affordable housing built near me -- affordable housing which I will not benefit from, because, as I said, I already live here. The idea that this is all just a way for 30something single dudes to get into this neighborhood is silly (for one, why would you want to live in this neighborhood as a single dude?).

“I want my neighborhood to be economically less desirable”

Why would a few affordable housing units make a neighborhood less desirable?

So you only want a few low income neighbors? What’s your limit? Why do you have a limit? What’s wrong with living near low income people that you don’t want to live near too many of them?

Still not seeing a response here. It’s interesting that the “more neighbors” crowd want to quota poor people in their own neighborhoods. Can’t have too many, right? It’s what IZ is all about.

I'm not the PP who you were responding to, but I think you're the only one who suggested anything about a quota. I'd be fine with any amount of affordable housing units in my neighborhood -- it's extremely unlikely that there will be the money or political will to add enough units to make me feel that the neighborhood has substantially changed enough for me to dislike it here (that would probably require converting something like 50 percent of the single-family houses to large apartment buildings, which isn't ever happening). Any amount of affordable housing in Tenleytown would be a significant improvement. Just because no one decided to argue your weird rhetorical point doesn't mean the "'more neighbors crowd'" wants to limit poor people nearby, it mostly means no one wants to engage with a ridiculous bad-faith reading of what the PP posted.

Mr “bad faith reading” here seems to be ironically engaged in bad faith. Here is the direct quote.

Why would a few affordable housing units make a neighborhood less desirable?

[Anonymous]

I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

So thanks for confirm your quota of housing for poor people in your neighborhood. Just can’t have too many to alter the neighborhood character.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

So thanks for confirm your quota of housing for poor people in your neighborhood. Just can’t have too many to alter the neighborhood character.

I would be happy with thousands. You are the one implying a quote. I put no such restrictions on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Can you proviso some examples of what you are referring to?

Me either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

So thanks for confirm your quota of housing for poor people in your neighborhood. Just can’t have too many to alter the neighborhood character.

I would be happy with thousands. You are the one implying a quote. I put no such restrictions on it.

You said that a few hundred would not change the character of a neighborhood. Since you believe there is a threshold for changing character of neighborhoods, how many would that be? What’s the number?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

So thanks for confirm your quota of housing for poor people in your neighborhood. Just can’t have too many to alter the neighborhood character.

I would be happy with thousands. You are the one implying a quote. I put no such restrictions on it.

You said that a few hundred would not change the character of a neighborhood. Since you believe there is a threshold for changing character of neighborhoods, how many would that be? What’s the number?

Well, let's see. Each ANC holds roughly 2,000 people, so let's assume Tenleytown and Friendship Heights currently have about 3,000 people, rounding up for the sake of argument. I'm a different PP, and I'd be fine with adding more than 1,000 new affordable units in the neighborhood -- which would, assuming most of them are built to suit families, approximately double the current population. I think it'd probably be hard to fit many more units than that into the area, but it would be space, not the existence of more residents or their income levels, that would be my main worry about adding more than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the "bad faith" poster. I would be happy with hundreds of affordable units, and I don't think that would change the neighborhood, much less change it for the worse.

So thanks for confirm your quota of housing for poor people in your neighborhood. Just can’t have too many to alter the neighborhood character.

I would be happy with thousands. You are the one implying a quote. I put no such restrictions on it.

You said that a few hundred would not change the character of a neighborhood. Since you believe there is a threshold for changing character of neighborhoods, how many would that be? What’s the number?

DP. That is not implicit in the PP's claim. It's pretty transparent you're debating in bad faith, just in case you weren't aware.