Looks like CC Historic District is Dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

Who cares what a group of Ivory Towers pseudo professors think! If you can't do, you teach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

This is such a bunch of nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

This is such a bunch of nonsense.

but progressive believe this and they have take over the democratic party.

[Anonymous]

Oh, the listserv is going to have a hard time with this. Maybe someone will pen a poem to memorialize its demise and thank Mary for all her efforts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

It is not a myth. The research indicates this is a strong preference for American consumers. Ok, most Americans also don't care about UN resolutions or other top-down mandates that attempt to force urban planner ideas on everyone. This may be a consensus among urban planners, but there are multiple aspects to evaluate whether land use policies "work" and environmental sustainability is only one of them. Quality of life, crime rates, friendliness to family life and impact on fertility rates are also other very important considerations. It is very challenging for people with large families 3+ kids to live in multifamily housing. There are almost no densely populated areas in wealthy countries with replacement-level fertility rates. The evidence is also strong that density is causally correlated with lower fertility rates. If birth rates continue to decline everywhere, humans will go extinct. Unfortunately, environmental sustainability and maintaining a stable population are at odds with each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

It is not a myth. The research indicates this is a strong preference for American consumers. Ok, most Americans also don't care about UN resolutions or other top-down mandates that attempt to force urban planner ideas on everyone. This may be a consensus among urban planners, but there are multiple aspects to evaluate whether land use policies "work" and environmental sustainability is only one of them. Quality of life, crime rates, friendliness to family life and impact on fertility rates are also other very important considerations. It is very challenging for people with large families 3+ kids to live in multifamily housing. There are almost no densely populated areas in wealthy countries with replacement-level fertility rates. The evidence is also strong that density is causally correlated with lower fertility rates. If birth rates continue to decline everywhere, humans will go extinct. Unfortunately, environmental sustainability and maintaining a stable population are at odds with each other.

at no time in human history has single family homes like we have in suburban US been the norm. It is an abberration to have so few people occupying so much space. As population grows, it is simple math, we either need to build more densly or find another planet to eventually grow into. We can talk about preferences until we are blue in the face, but there are limited resources on this planet, and designing for single family homes and highway based daily transportation is simply unsustainable. Planners plan for the future. Hence the consensus among planners about where to encourage decision makers to push.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

It is not a myth. The research indicates this is a strong preference for American consumers. Ok, most Americans also don't care about UN resolutions or other top-down mandates that attempt to force urban planner ideas on everyone. This may be a consensus among urban planners, but there are multiple aspects to evaluate whether land use policies "work" and environmental sustainability is only one of them. Quality of life, crime rates, friendliness to family life and impact on fertility rates are also other very important considerations. It is very challenging for people with large families 3+ kids to live in multifamily housing. There are almost no densely populated areas in wealthy countries with replacement-level fertility rates. The evidence is also strong that density is causally correlated with lower fertility rates. If birth rates continue to decline everywhere, humans will go extinct. Unfortunately, environmental sustainability and maintaining a stable population are at odds with each other.

at no time in human history has single family homes like we have in suburban US been the norm. It is an abberration to have so few people occupying so much space. As population grows, it is simple math, we either need to build more densly or find another planet to eventually grow into. We can talk about preferences until we are blue in the face, but there are limited resources on this planet, and designing for single family homes and highway based daily transportation is simply unsustainable. Planners plan for the future. Hence the consensus among planners about where to encourage decision makers to push.

When 250,000 to 300,000 illegal aliens get across the border every month, that does create more demand for housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

Oh, UN resolutions. Now you've convinced us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

Oh, UN resolutions. Now you've convinced us.

Do something about human population growth and the impacts of climate change forcing millions of humans to be displaced, many of them to the US, and then we can have a discussion.

[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:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

DP, but the broader point is that what the US has been doing from a land use and transportation standpoint since the 1940's has proven not to work, so it is time to try something else, which means more density, more mass transit, etc and less single family homes and single occupancy cars.

You are saying this as such a matter of fact statement when it is a very opinionated statement. It depends on what you are trying accomplish whether this is the most desirable option or not. Most Americans frankly don’t want to live in dense apartment communities. And the vast majority of Americans that can afford to live in SFH chose to do so.

And it is unsustaniable from a landuse and transportation policy to cater to the myth that everyone has to live in a single family home. We need to change the discussion rather than catering to something that doesn't work and can't continue.

And no, it isn't an opinion, it is the consensus of urban planners and transportation planners and engineers over the past 30 years in context of UN resolutions and other climate change actions.

It is not a myth. The research indicates this is a strong preference for American consumers. Ok, most Americans also don't care about UN resolutions or other top-down mandates that attempt to force urban planner ideas on everyone. This may be a consensus among urban planners, but there are multiple aspects to evaluate whether land use policies "work" and environmental sustainability is only one of them. Quality of life, crime rates, friendliness to family life and impact on fertility rates are also other very important considerations. It is very challenging for people with large families 3+ kids to live in multifamily housing. There are almost no densely populated areas in wealthy countries with replacement-level fertility rates. The evidence is also strong that density is causally correlated with lower fertility rates. If birth rates continue to decline everywhere, humans will go extinct. Unfortunately, environmental sustainability and maintaining a stable population are at odds with each other.

at no time in human history has single family homes like we have in suburban US been the norm. It is an abberration to have so few people occupying so much space. As population grows, it is simple math, we either need to build more densly or find another planet to eventually grow into. We can talk about preferences until we are blue in the face, but there are limited resources on this planet, and designing for single family homes and highway based daily transportation is simply unsustainable. Planners plan for the future. Hence the consensus among planners about where to encourage decision makers to push.

When 250,000 to 300,000 illegal aliens get across the border every month, that does create more demand for housing.

Am I the only one who assumes we will find another planet to grow into? This seems obvious to me. And for now, there are lots of ways to live in our beautiful land depending on lifestyle choice-town, city, suburbs, country, off grid. There is zero reason an advanced country that does tons of carbon offsets etc etc can't accommodate SFHs. We could focus on clean, fast shared transport, solar, gyroscaping rather than lawns, and all kinds of things--but this idea that EVERYONEINAMERICAMUSTBESTACKEDONONEANOTHERTOSAVETHEPLANET is bizarre and frankly, unimaginative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's the best piece I've read on the proposal. Quite glad it's dead. Racists gonna racist. https://ggwash.org/view/93212/chevy-chase-historic-district-applicants-admit-what-its-actually-about

I dunno. Seems like the only people who are really into increasing density are white people who are *desperate* to move into overwhelmingly white neighborhoods. There's already lots of affordable housing in majority black neighborhoods that they like to pretend doesn't exist.

Chef's kiss +1000

They are very picky about neighborhoods they want to move into, cheaply--they think that building tons of 1 bedroom condo will allow them to live in the nicest parts of DC for 1500 a month. Not going to happen.

It will if you can the oldsters out lf their SFHs and into the condos. That's the next step.

You people simply want to utilize the state to force your will on others — at their expense for your benefit. Same as it always was with you people.

In academia, i.e., in urban planning and public policy, the single family home is simply not viable as a housing type going forward, especially near cities. That has been the case for about 15 years in the top programs. Most of those students are now planners (many working for government agencies), politicians, community activists and organizers, housing advocates, renters, etc.

Transportation planning has not quite caught up yet, since 6 lane arterials are still built to the standards of sprawling suburbia. But freeways are finally coming down in a few cities, under Buttigieg, and road narrowing projects, with dedicated bike lanes are moving forward in cities and older suburbs where single family homes are being phased out.

This is such a bunch of nonsense.