Wisconsin Ave Development Project

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue with upper NW is that most of it is zoned for detached SFH. we need to abolish these zoning barriers and build townhouses, apartments, and high rises. If you want a sleepy suburb, go to Bethesda or Potomac. This is the capital of the United States, and it should reflect that vibrancy

The Yes in *Your* Back Yard contingent checks in, as usual. It's never about their own sacrifice, it's always someone else who has to sacrifice.

As a homeowner, I do not want the government to limit what I am able to build in my own plot of land. I also don’t want to limit my neighbors’ choices of what they want to put on their own land. If they want to leave it (unimproved) as a detached SFH, they can knock themselves out! My land, my choice.

The idea that what I am able to build on my land does not affect the value of your land is false. If you build a SFH next a to 12 story building, your SFH is not worth much. What I pay for a piece of property is affected directly by the surroundings.

I don’t understand…i mean it is weird to build a SFH next to a 12 story building because you just pissed away the value of that land which also could have a 12 story building built on it. Nobody would pay you the value of a SFH to actually live in it…but it would be worth a lot because you can also construct a high rise on it.

So, I get to buy a SFH next to your SFH, tear down my SFH, build a 12 story apartment or condo building, and destroy much of the reason why you bought your SFH. Yes, you can sell and obtain perhaps a higher value. But I have placed you in a very undesirable place-sell or live next to an ugly building. Those who support upzoning are many of the same individuals who opposed gentrification.

Well your previous post was only about value…but if all the sudden we could all erect 12-story buildings the value of our homes would like triple or more.

I will take that.

Why? Who is going to live in all these condos? Where is the evidence that DC’s population is going to triple, or more?

Investor bought. Paid with above market rate housing vouchers. Wash and repeat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

How would Northwest DC stay 'desirable' with this plan obliterate the SFHs, low density and green space? Is there just some magic pixie dust in NW DC that makes it desirable NO MATTER WHAT? At that point, Anacostia will become fully desirable, with its rolling hills, underenrolled schools and plenty o' SFH. People want to move to NW for a reason, and when the reason is gone--that it's a pleasant place to live -they will go too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue with upper NW is that most of it is zoned for detached SFH. we need to abolish these zoning barriers and build townhouses, apartments, and high rises. If you want a sleepy suburb, go to Bethesda or Potomac. This is the capital of the United States, and it should reflect that vibrancy

The Yes in *Your* Back Yard contingent checks in, as usual. It's never about their own sacrifice, it's always someone else who has to sacrifice.

As a homeowner, I do not want the government to limit what I am able to build in my own plot of land. I also don’t want to limit my neighbors’ choices of what they want to put on their own land. If they want to leave it (unimproved) as a detached SFH, they can knock themselves out! My land, my choice.

The idea that what I am able to build on my land does not affect the value of your land is false. If you build a SFH next a to 12 story building, your SFH is not worth much. What I pay for a piece of property is affected directly by the surroundings.

I don’t understand…i mean it is weird to build a SFH next to a 12 story building because you just pissed away the value of that land which also could have a 12 story building built on it. Nobody would pay you the value of a SFH to actually live in it…but it would be worth a lot because you can also construct a high rise on it.

So, I get to buy a SFH next to your SFH, tear down my SFH, build a 12 story apartment or condo building, and destroy much of the reason why you bought your SFH. Yes, you can sell and obtain perhaps a higher value. But I have placed you in a very undesirable place-sell or live next to an ugly building. Those who support upzoning are many of the same individuals who opposed gentrification.

Well your previous post was only about value…but if all the sudden we could all erect 12-story buildings the value of our homes would like triple or more.

I will take that.

Why? Who is going to live in all these condos? Where is the evidence that DC’s population is going to triple, or more?

Investor bought. Paid with above market rate housing vouchers. Wash and repeat.

This has happened with quite few condo units in NW, entirely possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

How would Northwest DC stay 'desirable' with this plan obliterate the SFHs, low density and green space? Is there just some magic pixie dust in NW DC that makes it desirable NO MATTER WHAT? At that point, Anacostia will become fully desirable, with its rolling hills, underenrolled schools and plenty o' SFH. People want to move to NW for a reason, and when the reason is gone--that it's a pleasant place to live -they will go too.

All of this. The schools are a huge draw too. If they decline, are over-enrolled, etc., there goes the tax base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

Yuck. Can you point me to anything in writing that discusses this possibility for Ward 3 and environs? I mean I’m certainly familiar with the concept. Look no further than Minneapolis. But I was unaware that this is being discussed in a serious way for upper northwest.

[Anonymous]

Please check your deeds. A lot of NW blocks have some sort of historic covenant. Some are racist, some are not; the racist portions are regrettable and unenforceable. However, the covenants stay with the land. If you have that, meaning your neighbors do (too), you are protected from all these shenanigans.

In fact, these historic covenants are the only way some Arlington neighborhoods were able to prevent high or gentle density on their street.

If these zoning changes come to pass as our Council has indicated, I think those of us with the benefit of these covenants will be sitting on some of the most expensive real estate in the region. If you’re not benefiting from these, you might still laugh all the way to the bank by being the first to sell to the builder but then it’s the race to the bottom for the rest of the block.

So, I was going to say, please recall Allen and Nadeau who want to do this, don’t vote for Frumin again etc. but actually I stand to make a lot of money, so as you were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there is or will be demand. With the plan to convert office buildings into housing downtown, that will be an additional flood of units.

Townhouses would have demand. More tiny apartments? I don't see it.

I think it is likely that the population of DC will drop in the short-medium term. With jobs shifting elsewhere and remote work going to increase when CRE leases are renegotiated, why pay the cost of living here that comes with so many downsides? This is not DC of 2010 with the majority of work in office and downtown.

Most of the office buildings downtown are not suitable for residential. The bank will take ownership and sell at 25 cents on the dollar so the next owner can raze and build anew.

And building a new means potentially building condos or apartments, preferably large ones for families. And, yes, there are plenty of mid-block buildings that might be convertible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue with upper NW is that most of it is zoned for detached SFH. we need to abolish these zoning barriers and build townhouses, apartments, and high rises. If you want a sleepy suburb, go to Bethesda or Potomac. This is the capital of the United States, and it should reflect that vibrancy

The Yes in *Your* Back Yard contingent checks in, as usual. It's never about their own sacrifice, it's always someone else who has to sacrifice.

As a homeowner, I do not want the government to limit what I am able to build in my own plot of land. I also don’t want to limit my neighbors’ choices of what they want to put on their own land. If they want to leave it (unimproved) as a detached SFH, they can knock themselves out! My land, my choice.

The idea that what I am able to build on my land does not affect the value of your land is false. If you build a SFH next a to 12 story building, your SFH is not worth much. What I pay for a piece of property is affected directly by the surroundings.

I don’t understand…i mean it is weird to build a SFH next to a 12 story building because you just pissed away the value of that land which also could have a 12 story building built on it. Nobody would pay you the value of a SFH to actually live in it…but it would be worth a lot because you can also construct a high rise on it.

So, I get to buy a SFH next to your SFH, tear down my SFH, build a 12 story apartment or condo building, and destroy much of the reason why you bought your SFH. Yes, you can sell and obtain perhaps a higher value. But I have placed you in a very undesirable place-sell or live next to an ugly building. Those who support upzoning are many of the same individuals who opposed gentrification.

Well your previous post was only about value…but if all the sudden we could all erect 12-story buildings the value of our homes would like triple or more.

I will take that.

You clearly did not purchase a SFH with the idea of raising a family in that SFH. If you did, you would have different view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But where’s the demand for so many condos? I’m genuinely curious given that so many are coming online and places like city ridge have struggled.

If there's no demand for what the builders are building, the builders won't build it.

You must believe that builders have perfect vision about the future. They do not obviously. Moreover, to the extent that they do, it is a short term vision. There are already plenty of condos in and around FH and in Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

Yuck. Can you point me to anything in writing that discusses this possibility for Ward 3 and environs? I mean I’m certainly familiar with the concept. Look no further than Minneapolis. But I was unaware that this is being discussed in a serious way for upper northwest.

There is no current proposal to change single family zoning in the District of Columbia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please check your deeds. A lot of NW blocks have some sort of historic covenant. Some are racist, some are not; the racist portions are regrettable and unenforceable. However, the covenants stay with the land. If you have that, meaning your neighbors do (too), you are protected from all these shenanigans.

In fact, these historic covenants are the only way some Arlington neighborhoods were able to prevent high or gentle density on their street.

If these zoning changes come to pass as our Council has indicated, I think those of us with the benefit of these covenants will be sitting on some of the most expensive real estate in the region. If you’re not benefiting from these, you might still laugh all the way to the bank by being the first to sell to the builder but then it’s the race to the bottom for the rest of the block.

So, I was going to say, please recall Allen and Nadeau who want to do this, don’t vote for Frumin again etc. but actually I stand to make a lot of money, so as you were.

Lighten up, Francis. There are no such proposals, which would need to go to ANCs and the Zoning Commission, before going to the Council.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

How would Northwest DC stay 'desirable' with this plan obliterate the SFHs, low density and green space? Is there just some magic pixie dust in NW DC that makes it desirable NO MATTER WHAT? At that point, Anacostia will become fully desirable, with its rolling hills, underenrolled schools and plenty o' SFH. People want to move to NW for a reason, and when the reason is gone--that it's a pleasant place to live -they will go too.

All of this. The schools are a huge draw too. If they decline, are over-enrolled, etc., there goes the tax base.

The dismantling of Ward 3 puzzles me for this reason. It's like eating the golden goose. Reasonable measures like homeless shelters and vouchers with oversight and supports would make sense...but that's not what has occurred. Razing SFHs and relentlessly building more condos is just going to further corrode the appeal of gracious neighborhoods in NW DC that already have a mixture of Sfh, duplex (we live in one), multiplex, apartments and condos. When we drove down Wisconsin to our home I said to my family, I will miss this - the city is unique with it's low buildings (which the density bros hate), setbacks (which the density bros despise), wide Blvd, view of the cathedral, trees, parks, libraries that are just... libraries, strollability. This is city wide. This is what the density bros want to destroy. Without that, there's not a lot to miss. We were coming home from looking at SFH in MD for what it's worth, where yes development is happening but the Sfh are being replaced by newer, bulkier Sfh... Not apartments. The house we were looking at is tasteful, fwiw, and the neighborhood smells better. Density bros plus urban blight promoting policy are systemically destroying NW DC, and all of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please check your deeds. A lot of NW blocks have some sort of historic covenant. Some are racist, some are not; the racist portions are regrettable and unenforceable. However, the covenants stay with the land. If you have that, meaning your neighbors do (too), you are protected from all these shenanigans.

In fact, these historic covenants are the only way some Arlington neighborhoods were able to prevent high or gentle density on their street.

If these zoning changes come to pass as our Council has indicated, I think those of us with the benefit of these covenants will be sitting on some of the most expensive real estate in the region. If you’re not benefiting from these, you might still laugh all the way to the bank by being the first to sell to the builder but then it’s the race to the bottom for the rest of the block.

So, I was going to say, please recall Allen and Nadeau who want to do this, don’t vote for Frumin again etc. but actually I stand to make a lot of money, so as you were.

Lighten up, Francis. There are no such proposals, which would need to go to ANCs and the Zoning Commission, before going to the Council.

Can you explain the difference between a historical convenent and changing zoning? Covenented land is exempted? I can only think of parts of CP near us that are historically zoned. Isn't the rest a free for all of the Council changes the zoning permissions? Is there semi -covenanted land they can't touch? Pls clarify - helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now the development agenda is to hollow out single family zoning in Northwest DC by allowing 6 to 9 unit apartment buildings by right on side streets within a half-mile of a bus line. That’s pretty much anywhere. They soothingly call it “gentle density.”

How would Northwest DC stay 'desirable' with this plan obliterate the SFHs, low density and green space? Is there just some magic pixie dust in NW DC that makes it desirable NO MATTER WHAT? At that point, Anacostia will become fully desirable, with its rolling hills, underenrolled schools and plenty o' SFH. People want to move to NW for a reason, and when the reason is gone--that it's a pleasant place to live -they will go too.

All of this. The schools are a huge draw too. If they decline, are over-enrolled, etc., there goes the tax base.

The dismantling of Ward 3 puzzles me for this reason. It's like eating the golden goose. Reasonable measures like homeless shelters and vouchers with oversight and supports would make sense...but that's not what has occurred. Razing SFHs and relentlessly building more condos is just going to further corrode the appeal of gracious neighborhoods in NW DC that already have a mixture of Sfh, duplex (we live in one), multiplex, apartments and condos. When we drove down Wisconsin to our home I said to my family, I will miss this - the city is unique with it's low buildings (which the density bros hate), setbacks (which the density bros despise), wide Blvd, view of the cathedral, trees, parks, libraries that are just... libraries, strollability. This is city wide. This is what the density bros want to destroy. Without that, there's not a lot to miss. We were coming home from looking at SFH in MD for what it's worth, where yes development is happening but the Sfh are being replaced by newer, bulkier Sfh... Not apartments. The house we were looking at is tasteful, fwiw, and the neighborhood smells better. Density bros plus urban blight promoting policy are systemically destroying NW DC, and all of DC.

Except this whole thread is about condos and what not on Wisconsin Avenue..there is no proposal regarding changing zoning and tearing down SFHs to erect apartments. Wisconsin Avenue is commercial and apartments/multi family housing. There aren’t SFHs in Wisconsin in FHs.

Unfortunately, this DCUM and everyone goes off on strange and imaginary tangents which distract from the thread.

[Anonymous]

Covenants, especially racial covenants, have not been enforceable for a long time. Many people have still taken the steps to remove them. These are not to be confused with historic districts, which seek to preserve the look of certain neighborhoods deemed worthy of preservation. Many neighborhoods in DC are historic districts. It doesn't mean you can't expand a home in those areas; renovations must simply be compatible. Zoning refers to the rules regarding density, massing, FAR, etc that jurisdictions establish standards on building.