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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC 2,000,000.

20 year goal to develop 50 of DC's square miles to roughly Columbia Heights density (40,000 / smi). Leave the other 16 square miles as parks and public buildings.

1) by right mixed-use development to lot lines x 4 stories. Denser pre-existing zones can remain.
2) third-party bonded and video-recorded building inspections to international code. Zero permitting fees.
3) Allow ADUs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Allow 'tiny' multi-familyhousing. If the builder thinks they'll rent, let them build it (to fire code).
4) zero parking requirements
5) city-wide market-rate street parking. Market rate means whatever hourly rate (can be variable) that keeps one spot open per block. Also, 15 minute loading & unloading zones at every intersection.
6) bounties for video record of parking violators. Steep fines for same.
7) un-tax buildings. Split rate tax, with zero tax on assessed improvement value, revenue neutral shift to land value.
8) later, un-tax personal property, deed, and general sales taxes in the same manner.
9) keep on going by un-taxing business and corporate taxes, personal income taxes, and other taxes and permits.
10) build one-way dedicated bus rapid transit lines every other block (e.g. NB on 16th st, SB on 14th st) ~40 NB/SB, ~40 EB/WB. Make them free to ride. Run at least half of them 24/7 with not more than 10 minute headways and stops not closer than 1/4 mile apart.
11) School Vouchers
12) Housing Vouchers
13) develop the other 16 square miles to be accessible parkland (but enforce no camping laws and basic sanitation)
14) allow businesses to rent street parking at market rate for dedicated parking or cafe space

So you wind up with a city with ONE SINGLE TAX (the tax on land values) that everyone pays anyway, just usually to a land lord or a previous owner. No sales, income, or corporate taxes. Expensive but easy to park, easier to walk not more 1/4 mile to a free bus line. Housing market would be safe and responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by permitting and inspections. Education system would be responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by lethargic Public School System.

This is hilarious. Somebody has been playing SIMCITY too long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC 2,000,000.

20 year goal to develop 50 of DC's square miles to roughly Columbia Heights density (40,000 / smi). Leave the other 16 square miles as parks and public buildings.

1) by right mixed-use development to lot lines x 4 stories. Denser pre-existing zones can remain.
2) third-party bonded and video-recorded building inspections to international code. Zero permitting fees.
3) Allow ADUs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Allow 'tiny' multi-familyhousing. If the builder thinks they'll rent, let them build it (to fire code).
4) zero parking requirements
5) city-wide market-rate street parking. Market rate means whatever hourly rate (can be variable) that keeps one spot open per block. Also, 15 minute loading & unloading zones at every intersection.
6) bounties for video record of parking violators. Steep fines for same.
7) un-tax buildings. Split rate tax, with zero tax on assessed improvement value, revenue neutral shift to land value.
8) later, un-tax personal property, deed, and general sales taxes in the same manner.
9) keep on going by un-taxing business and corporate taxes, personal income taxes, and other taxes and permits.
10) build one-way dedicated bus rapid transit lines every other block (e.g. NB on 16th st, SB on 14th st) ~40 NB/SB, ~40 EB/WB. Make them free to ride. Run at least half of them 24/7 with not more than 10 minute headways and stops not closer than 1/4 mile apart.
11) School Vouchers
12) Housing Vouchers
13) develop the other 16 square miles to be accessible parkland (but enforce no camping laws and basic sanitation)
14) allow businesses to rent street parking at market rate for dedicated parking or cafe space

So you wind up with a city with ONE SINGLE TAX (the tax on land values) that everyone pays anyway, just usually to a land lord or a previous owner. No sales, income, or corporate taxes. Expensive but easy to park, easier to walk not more 1/4 mile to a free bus line. Housing market would be safe and responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by permitting and inspections. Education system would be responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by lethargic Public School System.

This is hilarious. Somebody has been playing SIMCITY too long.

Why not go build a purpose built city from the ground up for this vision, like the Saudis are doing with Neom or whatever it's called. Why would you attempt it with an existing , quite historical city with lots of charm + livability that needs tweaks not sledgehammers?

[Anonymous]

I don't want to live in a shabby overcrowded Ikea city. I like the historic architecture and green leafy trees of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't want to live in a shabby overcrowded Ikea city. I like the historic architecture and green leafy trees of DC.

GGW invites you to consider the merits of remaking Washington, DC into interlocking LEGO cube domiciles clustered around Metro.

[Anonymous]

If i wanted to live in the smart growth cities proposed by GGW, I would time travel back to mid-60s Stalingrad.

[Anonymous]

The GGW crowd's vision of the future is a cheap college dorm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If i wanted to live in the smart growth cities proposed by GGW, I would time travel back to mid-60s Stalingrad.

Guessing, like then, you won't find any of the proponents in the housing they build.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

Which part?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

Which part?

All of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC 2,000,000.

20 year goal to develop 50 of DC's square miles to roughly Columbia Heights density (40,000 / smi). Leave the other 16 square miles as parks and public buildings.

1) by right mixed-use development to lot lines x 4 stories. Denser pre-existing zones can remain.
2) third-party bonded and video-recorded building inspections to international code. Zero permitting fees.
3) Allow ADUs, duplexes, triplexes, etc. Allow 'tiny' multi-familyhousing. If the builder thinks they'll rent, let them build it (to fire code).
4) zero parking requirements
5) city-wide market-rate street parking. Market rate means whatever hourly rate (can be variable) that keeps one spot open per block. Also, 15 minute loading & unloading zones at every intersection.
6) bounties for video record of parking violators. Steep fines for same.
7) un-tax buildings. Split rate tax, with zero tax on assessed improvement value, revenue neutral shift to land value.
8) later, un-tax personal property, deed, and general sales taxes in the same manner.
9) keep on going by un-taxing business and corporate taxes, personal income taxes, and other taxes and permits.
10) build one-way dedicated bus rapid transit lines every other block (e.g. NB on 16th st, SB on 14th st) ~40 NB/SB, ~40 EB/WB. Make them free to ride. Run at least half of them 24/7 with not more than 10 minute headways and stops not closer than 1/4 mile apart.
11) School Vouchers
12) Housing Vouchers
13) develop the other 16 square miles to be accessible parkland (but enforce no camping laws and basic sanitation)
14) allow businesses to rent street parking at market rate for dedicated parking or cafe space

So you wind up with a city with ONE SINGLE TAX (the tax on land values) that everyone pays anyway, just usually to a land lord or a previous owner. No sales, income, or corporate taxes. Expensive but easy to park, easier to walk not more 1/4 mile to a free bus line. Housing market would be safe and responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by permitting and inspections. Education system would be responsive to market demand, rather than throttled by lethargic Public School System.

This is hilarious. Somebody has been playing SIMCITY too long.

Why not go build a purpose built city from the ground up for this vision, like the Saudis are doing with Neom or whatever it's called. Why would you attempt it with an existing , quite historical city with lots of charm + livability that needs tweaks not sledgehammers?

We should. Probably could decommission an army base for it, but would probably need to remediate UXO first.

[Anonymous]

Everyone who lives in D.C. has a home, by definition, except for the relatively small number of homeless people who populate our streets and shelters. The homeless lack homes because that lack money, not because the homes do not exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

Which part?

All of it.

That’s a gross overstatement. The Smart Growth people are even moving away from saying “affordable housing” and saying “more attainable housing” instead because the affordable housing lie is no longer tenable. The developers whose water you’re carrying will take every concession you’re fighting for to margin if they’re left unchecked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

Which part?

All of it.

That’s a gross overstatement. The Smart Growth people are even moving away from saying “affordable housing” and saying “more attainable housing” instead because the affordable housing lie is no longer tenable. The developers whose water you’re carrying will take every concession you’re fighting for to margin if they’re left unchecked.

They need to just call it less costly or lower priced housing, which is really what is desired. All housing that is occupied I would propose, is by definition, both affordable and attainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This is a patently false statement.

Which part?

All of it.

That’s a gross overstatement. The Smart Growth people are even moving away from saying “affordable housing” and saying “more attainable housing” instead because the affordable housing lie is no longer tenable. The developers whose water you’re carrying will take every concession you’re fighting for to margin if they’re left unchecked.

Nope.

All.Of.It.

https://ward3vision.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Ward3Vision-Affordable-Housing-Vision-2021.pdf