maybe housing in dc isn't as expensive as everyone thinks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh OP, yes we have higher incomes but it's not proportionate to the cost of housing. We make $275/year and can't afford a 1200 sq ft, 3br craphole in zone for Wilson. Do a search for 3 bedroom homes or apartments under $1M in the city and see what dangerous part of town you end up in. We live in a tiny apartment with two kids and no car. We have no student loans and we don't take vacations. We save pretty well for retirement, but we need to because from 25-35 we were unable to save much. I am not willing to move to Columbia Heights or Petworth since I have young children.

There are loads of young children in Columbia heights, but understand if you want to have school access without lottery worries.

Honestly, it's not the schools I'm all that worried about, it's the bullets. Last time I was in Columbia Heights two or three weeks ago, we passed by moments before a shooting at 4pm on a Saturday. I understand that I have privilege because I CAN live in a tiny place in a safer part of the city and I feel that everyone deserves a life free of violence, but yeah, I just can't live there if I have a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:prices are high but so are incomes. practically everyone here makes a lot more money than they would doing the same job in most other places in this country. the only way to tell whether housing is expensive is to compare the cost of housing to how much people earn.

harvard has done that, and it suggests that while housing prices here are high, they're not as high as they are in denver or arizona or oregon (let alone places like new york city and san francisco and boston)

https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/home-price-income-ratios

At least housing prices aren't as bad as... Denver?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

Brandon Todd is going to lose his job over his relationship with developers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

I've never voted. Now the only thing I care about is my elected representatives' positions on developers. If they're pro-developer, I'm voting against them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

Brandon Todd is going to lose his job over his relationship with developers.

So not by the W3 nimbys. If he has a CORRUPT relationship, that is something else than the "save us from density folks".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

Brandon Todd is going to lose his job over his relationship with developers.

So not by the W3 nimbys. If he has a CORRUPT relationship, that is something else than the "save us from density folks".

Hostility to developers is what we're looking for in our elected representatives. If you think tearing down SFHs and replacing them with condos is ok, then we are against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Upzoning is stupid.

It won't make any difference to housing prices because there's, ahem, six million people in the suburbs and they all want better commutes.

!!!

They do NOT all want to be close in DC. By a long shot.

A huge number of them WORK in the suburbs. In Bethesda. In Rosslyn. In Crystal City. At the Pentagon. In Old Town Alexandria. In West Alexandria. At Fort Belvoir. In Tysons (over 100,000 jobs there!) In Reston. Near Dulles. In Ashburn. In Suitland. In New Carrolton.

Of the people who DO commute to DC, there are lots of people who just do not like DC for one reason or another, that would not be offset if housing prices were cheaper. And of course plenty who would move to DC for a detached SFH, but will never move into a 6 story condo building, or an ADU.

There's only 300,000 housing units in DC.

How many do you think can realistically be added over the next ten years? 30,000? Let's say those 30,000 units will hold 100,000 people. What's 100,000 divided by six million? 1.6 percent.

You don't think 1.6 percent of the people in the suburbs would happily move into the city?

There's so much wishful thinking behind this upzoning stuff.

1. Total multifamily housing construction in DC is running over 12,000 units a year. Some of those involve some loss of existing units, so say about 10,000 net new units. And that is with all the multiple constraints on new development - height limit, floor area ratio limits, SFH only zones, parking minimums, lawsuits against PUDs, etc. In ten years a hundred thousand units should be quite possible

2. Its not only DC adding units - so are Arlington, Alexandria, MoCo, Fairfax.

3. To get people to move who haven't already decided to (at the given rents/prices) you have to lower the rents/prices. Please come back when you understand what a downward sloping demand curve is.

The great hope among the density bros -- it's always 30-year old white guys pushing this -- is that increasing density will suddenly make housing prices crash and literally no one will notice except for them, and they will be able to buy a fantastic place in a fantastic neighborhood for almost nothing. There is so much wishful thinking involved.

1. I am not a 30 something white guy

2. I am not interested in moving to the District

3. I don't expect housing prices to crash. I want well located (short commute, transit oriented, etc) housing to be somewhat cheaper than otherwise, and in greater supply, because that is good for the people who move in to it, its generally good for municipal tax revenues, it probably actually reduces gentrification, and its good for the environment and for reducing auto dependence.

We are winning the policy debate - in localities across the country, in some states (SB 50 did not pass in Ca, but came closer than before), Dem presidential candidates are including supply oriented housing planks in their platforms, and the entire discourse is changing.

If it comforts you to focus on ad hominems against your opponents, go for it.

The politics of upzoning are terrible. I had never seen people on my block so angry as when a developer wanted to knock down a single family home and build a bunch of condos.

So who is running against Bowser on a "save the SFHs" platform?

Heck you people can't even get Cheh out of office.

Brandon Todd is going to lose his job over his relationship with developers.

So not by the W3 nimbys. If he has a CORRUPT relationship, that is something else than the "save us from density folks".

Hostility to developers is what we're looking for in our elected representatives. If you think tearing down SFHs and replacing them with condos is ok, then we are against you.

Has Janeese Lewis George (Todd's challenger) said she is against ever changing SFH only zoning? I can't find such a position on her website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Half the city though is not livable because of high crime and terrible schools. It's easy to state things aren't expensive when you are looking across all values when half the properties included are in very high crime areas. No one wants to raise their family in an area where you have to risk life and death just to save on a mortgage.

Racist much?

I still have 9 pages to go through, but how in the world is this racist???? I'm sure you live in the middle of Anacostia to prove you're not racist, right?

"Half the city is not livable"

Hmmm, what percentage of DC is black?

Oh yes, half.

You do realize that not all blacks living in dc are not “poor” or “criminals” right? There are many affluent and UMC blacks in DC.

But please, continue with your bigotry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:prices are high but so are incomes. practically everyone here makes a lot more money than they would doing the same job in most other places in this country. the only way to tell whether housing is expensive is to compare the cost of housing to how much people earn.

harvard has done that, and it suggests that while housing prices here are high, they're not as high as they are in denver or arizona or oregon (let alone places like new york city and san francisco and boston)

https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/home-price-income-ratios

+1

People make a lot of money in DC, which means housing is not as expensive as it may seem

*Some* people make a lot of money.

Cops and teachers and secretaries make at least twice as much here as they do where I grew up.

The DC government pays a lot. Interns make $40,000. Administrative assistants approach $100,000.

https://dchr.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dchr/publication/attachments/public_body_employee_information_191231.pdf

Wow. $40,000 interns.

Housing prices are high because everyone here makes a lot of money. Where I grew up, cops make $22,000 -- half of what a lowly intern for the city government makes.

I can't believe interns in the DC government make $40,000.