Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?
"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.
But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.
"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.
That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.
Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.
Great! I think we still have plenty of room for even more new housing, and especially actually affordable housing, in Ward 3, where I also live.
Absolutely. Several of the Ward 3 ANCs are being asked to support DC’s purchase of the Wardman Marriott site for affordable housing. This could be a once in a generation game-changer.
Add that area to the growing list of places to avoid in the city.
The Smart Growth industry, which constantly pushes the theme that DC needs more affordable housing, does not support converting the Marriott site for affordable units. The site is a potential good mine for market rate development, which is the Smart Growth real goal. “Affordable housing” is simply the political pretext to obtain their goal.