We need homes. A lot of homes. Not just affordable, but also middle-income homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How do you think those neighborhoods got to be like they are now? Developers have been doing that all over the place. (And yes, Trinidad and Brentwood are definitely poorer than AU Park.)

"Poorer than AU Park" is not usually what people mean, when they talk about "poor neighborhoods."

Anyway, I don't understand the argument here. Developers are voluntarily developing in poor neighborhoods (defined as: poorer than AU Park), and so therefore additional housing in AU Park shouldn't be allowed?

No, more housing in AU Park SHOULD be allowed. One PP has been suggesting that developers are not doing anything elsewhere in the city and that the push to upzone Ward 3 is just a stalking horse for developers' desires to build there. In reality, developers have already been building all over the city, and one advantage of encouraging building in AU Park is that at least it doesn't entail any of the concerns about gentrification.

If prices go up further as some have suggested due to "vibrant density" that's gentrification.

No, you can't gentrify an already rich neighborhood. Prices will not go up as a result of building smaller, cheaper housing units, but even if we pretend that theory makes sense, the end result would still not be gentrification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How do you think those neighborhoods got to be like they are now? Developers have been doing that all over the place. (And yes, Trinidad and Brentwood are definitely poorer than AU Park.)

"Poorer than AU Park" is not usually what people mean, when they talk about "poor neighborhoods."

Anyway, I don't understand the argument here. Developers are voluntarily developing in poor neighborhoods (defined as: poorer than AU Park), and so therefore additional housing in AU Park shouldn't be allowed?

No, more housing in AU Park SHOULD be allowed. One PP has been suggesting that developers are not doing anything elsewhere in the city and that the push to upzone Ward 3 is just a stalking horse for developers' desires to build there. In reality, developers have already been building all over the city, and one advantage of encouraging building in AU Park is that at least it doesn't entail any of the concerns about gentrification.

The idea that we shouldn’t invest in or build in communities outside of Ward 3 for fear of gentrification can do genuine, lasting harm to those communities. Abandoning communities or leaving them to stagnate because lower income black people live in them actually hurts - not helps - the cause of social justice.

No one here said we shouldn't invest or build in communities outside of Ward 3, or abandon them. But we also shouldn't just push all new development into those communities, especially without any advance consideration to the results of doing that, in the name of "improving" them. Nor should we resist building different kinds of housing, and more affordable housing, in already wealthy predominantly white neighborhoods because residents of those neighborhoods think that housing would be better put somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

That's nice.

Also nice: if there were more housing in [that area where you don't want there to be more housing], so that more people would be able to buy (or rent) a home they can afford in that area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

There's no need to condescendingly explain the housing market. And just so you're aware, you are saying "f*** you, I've got mine" when you simultaneously acknowledge that some areas are unaffordable, and also argue that we shouldn't build more housing there.

I look forward to your next deflection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah you can count me among the commenters who dislike GGW. They’re hypocritical, and they work to promote the interests of developers. Just like back when they were getting $$$ from WMATA that they didn’t disclose and then ignoring all of the metro’s glaring problems.

You can have any opinion you want, but it doesn't invalidate the reality that they are, in fact, advocating for upzoning/upFLUMing everywhere, not just Ward 3.

I’m not reading the link, but a lot of neighborhoods don’t need any upzoning in order to be further developed. So if their real goal is development and building more homes, why not start there?

They can theoretically be in favor of upzoning everywhere but to me it sounds like a convenient smokescreen for what their developer buddies really want to do (i.e., upzone in places like Ward 3).

Maybe read the link.

Here it is again: https://ggwash.org/view/75544/were-reading-amendments-to-the-comp-plan-heres-our-critique-of-how-the-flum-works

I told you why I won’t. Once GGW was caught taking money from sources and then writing in a way favorable to those sources, they discredited themselves.

How is this relevant to the point that they are, in fact, calling for upzoning/upFLUMing the whole city, not just Ward 3?

I don’t spend my time reading material from discredited sources. If you have an argument you want to make, why don’t you just make it yourself?

Let's recap.

A PP: How come they're not calling for upzoning/upFLUMing the whole city?
Me: They are. Look, here's a post on GGW saying just that.
You: I don't read GGW.
Me: Ok, but here's a post on GGW saying just that, even the PP said nobody is saying it.
You: I don't read GGW. Why don't you make your own argument?

I will reiterate: I think calling for upzoning throughout the whole city is a disingenuous smokescreen to accomplish what developers really want, which is to upzone in areas like Ward 3. There is a ton of development that could take place right now at this very moment without any need for upzoning. Think of all the new homes that could add! Why focus on changing the laws (a process that will involve a lengthy, drawn-out fight and may not happen at all) if your real goal is simply to add housing? Developers can add housing right now; no upzoning needed.

Because upzoning will enable more housing to be built than the status quo. Why is this so difficult for you to believe?

DC has fewer residents than it did in 1950, so not sure about housing crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

There's no need to condescendingly explain the housing market. And just so you're aware, you are saying "f*** you, I've got mine" when you simultaneously acknowledge that some areas are unaffordable, and also argue that we shouldn't build more housing there.

I look forward to your next deflection.

Look, there are neighborhoods and homes that I can’t afford and never will be able to afford. But I’m not bitter about it. That’s just how it goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

There's no need to condescendingly explain the housing market. And just so you're aware, you are saying "f*** you, I've got mine" when you simultaneously acknowledge that some areas are unaffordable, and also argue that we shouldn't build more housing there.

I look forward to your next deflection.

You are the entitled person that is unable to face your economic reality. Deal with it! You cant afford to buy a house in your preferred n-hood. Welcome to the real world!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

The flip side of that: f*** you, I can’t afford what I want so I am going to whine about and look to destroy yours!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah you can count me among the commenters who dislike GGW. They’re hypocritical, and they work to promote the interests of developers. Just like back when they were getting $$$ from WMATA that they didn’t disclose and then ignoring all of the metro’s glaring problems.

You can have any opinion you want, but it doesn't invalidate the reality that they are, in fact, advocating for upzoning/upFLUMing everywhere, not just Ward 3.

I’m not reading the link, but a lot of neighborhoods don’t need any upzoning in order to be further developed. So if their real goal is development and building more homes, why not start there?

They can theoretically be in favor of upzoning everywhere but to me it sounds like a convenient smokescreen for what their developer buddies really want to do (i.e., upzone in places like Ward 3).

Maybe read the link.

Here it is again: https://ggwash.org/view/75544/were-reading-amendments-to-the-comp-plan-heres-our-critique-of-how-the-flum-works

I told you why I won’t. Once GGW was caught taking money from sources and then writing in a way favorable to those sources, they discredited themselves.

How is this relevant to the point that they are, in fact, calling for upzoning/upFLUMing the whole city, not just Ward 3?

I don’t spend my time reading material from discredited sources. If you have an argument you want to make, why don’t you just make it yourself?

Let's recap.

A PP: How come they're not calling for upzoning/upFLUMing the whole city?
Me: They are. Look, here's a post on GGW saying just that.
You: I don't read GGW.
Me: Ok, but here's a post on GGW saying just that, even the PP said nobody is saying it.
You: I don't read GGW. Why don't you make your own argument?

I will reiterate: I think calling for upzoning throughout the whole city is a disingenuous smokescreen to accomplish what developers really want, which is to upzone in areas like Ward 3. There is a ton of development that could take place right now at this very moment without any need for upzoning. Think of all the new homes that could add! Why focus on changing the laws (a process that will involve a lengthy, drawn-out fight and may not happen at all) if your real goal is simply to add housing? Developers can add housing right now; no upzoning needed.

Because upzoning will enable more housing to be built than the status quo. Why is this so difficult for you to believe?

DC has fewer residents than it did in 1950, so not sure about housing crisis.

Lots of houses in DC were torn down to make way for office buildings downtown, 395 and 695, government buildings, etc. And, in case you hadn't noticed, household composition has changed pretty dramatically since the 1950s. Not only has DC effectively outlawed boarding houses, but houses containing multigenerational families are much less common. Pointing at DC's population peak as evidence that there is no housing crisis is, uh... several steps beyond ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

The flip side of that: f*** you, I can’t afford what I want so I am going to whine about and look to destroy yours!

Building more houses in a neighborhood is destroying it? Hoookay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry but I’m not the one who is suggesting that white people should stay out of lower-income black neighborhoods.

Are you one of the ones saying that Ward 3 should remain off-limits for people who don't have a lot of money?

Anyone is more than welcome to buy in Ward 3. Lovely center hall colonial in AU was just renovated up and now looks to becoming a 1.5 or 1.8 million home.

Welcome all!

Weird definition of "anyone" you have there.

The market price buyers - which is what drives everything. Reality. Sorry.

People who talk about capitalism while favoring restrictions on supply...

They're so close to just coming out and saying "f*** you, I've got mine!"

Everyone can buy whatever home they can afford. That’s how it works, and that’s how it essentially will always work. Home values exist on a spectrum in which less desirable homes in less desirable areas cost less and more desirable homes in more desirable areas cost more. It’s never going to change. If you want to buy something, you have to pay for it. Sometimes that means taking a job you don’t love because you want the paycheck or doing something else you don’t want to do, but that’s life. Sometimes that means some homes or even some neighborhoods will always be out of reach, but that too is life. Some of you do sound a bit entitled.

There's no need to condescendingly explain the housing market. And just so you're aware, you are saying "f*** you, I've got mine" when you simultaneously acknowledge that some areas are unaffordable, and also argue that we shouldn't build more housing there.

I look forward to your next deflection.

You are the entitled person that is unable to face your economic reality. Deal with it! You cant afford to buy a house in your preferred n-hood. Welcome to the real world!!

I'm perfectly content with my economic reality, thanks. The only entitled people in this thread are the ones who believe that they should be allowed to exercise power over other people's property to freeze their neighborhood in amber.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Look, there are neighborhoods and homes that I can’t afford and never will be able to afford. But I’m not bitter about it. That’s just how it goes.

Yes, it is. Now please explain why there shouldn't be more housing in the area you live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, there are neighborhoods and homes that I can’t afford and never will be able to afford. But I’m not bitter about it. That’s just how it goes.

Yes, it is. Now please explain why there shouldn't be more housing in the area you live in.

Developers can develop up to the limits of the law. Developing beyond that would be against the law which many of us relied upon when we purchased. Also, I like my neighborhood how it is. That’s why partly I bought the home that I did. My home is super important to me, and it is my largest investment by far. So I’m going to try to keep my neighborhood as nice as I can.