Soooo, how is high-density looking to everyone now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

Why so black and white PP? DC is very densely populated right now. By anybody's standards it is. We need better public transportation (WMATA you listening). What most people on this thread are saying is that DC does not need to be made MORE dense. Does that make sense to you? We are dense right now. We need better systems to accommodate the density that we have right now, and we do not need more density.

Yes, it makes sense to me - you're saying that DC is very densely populated right now, and since cars are inappropriate in very densely populated areas, we need to get rid of the cars and move towards the kinds of transportation and land uses that are appropriate for very densely populated areas, like many other cities all over the world are doing.

Just fix the metro/WMATA. Thank you.

No, that won't do at all. Central London will soon be one of the biggest no-car zones in the world. There's no reason why very-densely-populated DC couldn't do the same.

One simple way to reduce car dependence is to prohibit new development projects from participating in the RPP program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anybody else getting annoyed about the "Density Bro" PP's total erasure of the many women in DC who advocate for the stuff the PP opposes?

“Density Bros” also can be female or whatever, just like Bernie Bros. Myopic arrogance, ageism and nastiness knows no gender boundaries.

Yeah, that reminds me of the days when people said that "men" also includes women. It doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anybody else getting annoyed about the "Density Bro" PP's total erasure of the many women in DC who advocate for the stuff the PP opposes?

“Density Bros” also can be female or whatever, just like Bernie Bros. Myopic arrogance, ageism and nastiness knows no gender boundaries.

Yeah, that reminds me of the days when people said that "men" also includes women. It doesn't.

“Density Bras”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

Why so black and white PP? DC is very densely populated right now. By anybody's standards it is. We need better public transportation (WMATA you listening). What most people on this thread are saying is that DC does not need to be made MORE dense. Does that make sense to you? We are dense right now. We need better systems to accommodate the density that we have right now, and we do not need more density.

Yes, it makes sense to me - you're saying that DC is very densely populated right now, and since cars are inappropriate in very densely populated areas, we need to get rid of the cars and move towards the kinds of transportation and land uses that are appropriate for very densely populated areas, like many other cities all over the world are doing.

Just fix the metro/WMATA. Thank you.

No, that won't do at all. Central London will soon be one of the biggest no-car zones in the world. There's no reason why very-densely-populated DC couldn't do the same.

One simple way to reduce car dependence is to prohibit new development projects from participating in the RPP program.

This.

[Anonymous]

A population density of about 10,300 per square mile (the citywide density based on a population of around 700,000 and an area of 68.3 square miles) doesn’t even get the District into the top 100 densest areas in the country, according to these figures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density

The fact that some neighborhoods are denser than that or denser than some other neighborhoods elsewhere does not mean the city, overall — the CITY, not the area — is very dense, as some people here are arguing. Since no one is proposing to lift the height limits much in the densest neighborhoods, those areas can’t really get a lot denser, anyway.

It just isn’t true that D.C. is “already very dense,” unless your standard for “very dense” means “is denser than Santa Monica, California.”

[Anonymous]

Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

Could y'all make up your minds, please? Is more housing in DC bad because DC is already a dense city, or is more housing in DC bad because DC is not a dense city and shouldn't be one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

Could y'all make up your minds, please? Is more housing in DC bad because DC is already a dense city, or is more housing in DC bad because DC is not a dense city and shouldn't be one?

It's the Bros and Bras that don't get it. Too dense or not dense enough. Right now it's pretty darn nice. Let's not make it MORE dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

Could y'all make up your minds, please? Is more housing in DC bad because DC is already a dense city, or is more housing in DC bad because DC is not a dense city and shouldn't be one?

It's the Bros and Bras that don't get it. Too dense or not dense enough. Right now it's pretty darn nice. Let's not make it MORE dense.

OK, I'll put you in the Neighbors Against More Neighbors column.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

Could y'all make up your minds, please? Is more housing in DC bad because DC is already a dense city, or is more housing in DC bad because DC is not a dense city and shouldn't be one?

It's the Bros and Bras that don't get it. Too dense or not dense enough. Right now it's pretty darn nice. Let's not make it MORE dense.

OK, I'll put you in the Neighbors Against More Neighbors column.

We like single family zoning in the neighborhood. Why change that, to add traffic, noise, more demand on already-crowded schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we have sort of goal to be the densest city in the mid Atlantic? Good, we are not the densest city. Now, lets not try and get more dense.

Could y'all make up your minds, please? Is more housing in DC bad because DC is already a dense city, or is more housing in DC bad because DC is not a dense city and shouldn't be one?

It's the Bros and Bras that don't get it. Too dense or not dense enough. Right now it's pretty darn nice. Let's not make it MORE dense.

OK, I'll put you in the Neighbors Against More Neighbors column.

We like single family zoning in the neighborhood. Why change that, to add traffic, noise, more demand on already-crowded schools?

In case you haven't been outside the last 2 months it is cars and not people or density that cause noise.

And as has been pointed out ad nauseum the current Comp Plan proposal does not change the zoning in even one single family home zone in DC. Not in Ward 3 or anywhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

I'd start by getting rid of the bike lanes, since hardly anyone actually uses them. People actually use their cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

Amen to that. By the way, eliminate the parking lots, you eliminate all the jobs that people drive into the city to perform. Metro is not the answer.

I'd start by getting rid of the bike lanes, since hardly anyone actually uses them. People actually use their cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

I'd start by getting rid of the bike lanes, since hardly anyone actually uses them. People actually use their cars.

I think Covid-19 is causing you to hallucinate. DC hardly has any bike lanes but the ones DC has are in fact well used and are used almost exclusively by DC residents.

If you are so into driving why don't you move to a suburb where there are lots of roads and unlimited free parking and leave a walkable and bikeable city to the rest of us who aren't lazy slobs like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The point is DC is already way more densely populated than people realize.

You all are going to have to make up your minds about whether DC is or is not already densely populated.

If it's already densely populated, then there's no room for cars, and transit, walking, biking, and scooting need to be the priority transportation modes. In other words, the Bicycle Lobby is right: ban cars. (Yes, the Bicycle Lobby is a real organization. You can even buy a T-shirt! https://cottonbureau.com/products/the-all-powerful-bicycle-lobby#/1933563/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s )

If it isn't already densely populated, then there's room for cars, but you're going to have to ditch the argument that more density is inappropriate because DC is already densely populated.

Uh, what? This makes no sense. DC is obviously already very densely populated. Not sure what that has to do with cars. Perhaps you haven't noticed but we have bike lanes everywhere, even though barely anyone rides bikes here. The number of bicyclists in DC is pathetically small.

OK, DC is already very densely populated. That means there's no room for cars. As you may have noticed, cars require a lot of space. It's time to reallocate that space for use by DC's dense population. For example, turn all of the parking lots into parks.

I'd start by getting rid of the bike lanes, since hardly anyone actually uses them. People actually use their cars.

I think Covid-19 is causing you to hallucinate. DC hardly has any bike lanes but the ones DC has are in fact well used and are used almost exclusively by DC residents.

If you are so into driving why don't you move to a suburb where there are lots of roads and unlimited free parking and leave a walkable and bikeable city to the rest of us who aren't lazy slobs like you.

Ha. You should learn to write and argue better. You sound like a bratty 13-year old.

Also, here's an experiment: Go outside. Go for a walk or ride your bike or go for a drive. Count how many people on bicycles you see in one minute, or five minutes, if you prefer. It will be roughly the same number as the number of three-headed aliens on roller skates that you see during that time.