Project looming in our neighborhood

[ObserverCollege]

My partner works in development circles, and saw a memo showing that a nonprofit is getting ready to build a 10-story "mixed-income" condo development a block away from us (and our single-family home!!!). We moved where we did because we wanted to be near transit yet also in an excellent school district for our children.

Obviously we're highly concerned, as we never envisioned something like this happening where we are. We're certainly in favor of affordable housing, but we would prefer a smaller-scale project that fits the neighborhood, with ALL the units in the building made affordable. That way we'd end up with maybe 4 units of senior housing in a 2-story building coupled with a beautiful new park, rather than 40 or so all-ages units in a 10-story building. I would also imagine that there are other areas where the land costs are more reasonable, if in fact this developer actually cares about affordable housing. Furthermore, with 40 units it would be hard to make them all for the senior population. Thus, we worry about how good the screening will be to find the right kind of people whose kids will fit in and know how to behave in school, given that the developer is trying to fill 40+ units for these people.

Does anyone have any thoughts as to what to do to make sure the county does the right thing? I understand about talking to your neighbors, organizing, speaking at hearings, etc. But does that really work? My partner says in development that time is money, and that the best strategy is to be ready to go to the courts to slow down the process. He says even if you're not serious about winning the lawsuit, if you slow down the process enough that construction costs rise and tax credits expire so maybe this thing won't be built.

Does anyone have ideas as to how we could battle this out at the local level? A friend suggested some concerned citizens in Arlington have been battling the County over such a railroaded project, and have nearly made it collapse a couple of times through delays and whatnot. I just think of my partner and our two children, and how our lives would change so much for the worse if the wrong type of construction goes in near us.

Thank you so much.

Orlando

[Anonymous]

OK, I had to deal with this for YEARS in Tenleytown. Unfortunately, I'm not going to say what you want to hear, which is, what did you actually think was going to happen if you moved near transit? Every jurisdiction around has made it very clear that mixed-used development makes sense near transit and that they ALL were going to build up near there. The Tenley NIMBYs in DC had the exact same arguements you did and now we have a really unsightly abandoned project in the neighborhood (hello the former Babes billiards site). To be fair, NIMBYs like you also did a good job negotiating the nice set of condos and Best Buy near the metro, but I find this to be the exception. If you want to know how to do this, contact them. It's pretty simple: start a citizens group, go to all the county meetings spouting how shocked, SHOCKED you are that 10 story mixed use building would DARE go up near the metro, and then try to negotiate it down to duplexes or a 3 story condo building for only rich people. Do this for years. Become a thorn in your local representative's side. If you're a block away, you could also threaten to sue the developers for blocking your sunlight and then get paid out like, $30K to shut up (several neighbors did). Good luck.

[Anonymous]

You know, I've heard that the nonprofit groups are starting to say "enough's enough" with regard to people in places like Tenleytown. They say if these people want "sunshine", then they're going to give them sunshine. As I understand it, that means some fairly creative community activism.

For example, say the NIMBYs' kids largely go to the local neighborhood school, and that school's PTA wants the school playground to be boosted up the list for resodding. Normally this would be non-controversial. But not if a bunch of affordable housing activists show up at the School Board meeting and demand other schools be made a higher priority.

Or say the NIMBY plaintiff in a lawsuit against an affordable housing project also serves as a "human rights" attorney. One avenue would be to drop a dime to the media about a "demonstration" to be held outside the attorney's offices protesting his/her obstructive tactics in allowing people of lesser means to live near him/her.

Another mechanism would be to show up at property assessment hearings, and speak AGAINST a NIMBYite's property assessment appeal.

Finally, in light of NIMBY lawsuits against a project, the nonprofit developer could countersue for defamation, not to mention seek court costs to compensate for the original lawsuit.

Are these things "fair"? Of course not. But it's also not "fair" to file suit after suit, when you know full well the objective is to force the project to collapse under its own weight.

[Anonymous]

"Does anyone have any thoughts as to what to do to make sure the county does the right thing?"

Yes, indeed - the county should utterly refuse to entertain complaints from NIMBY elitists like yourself. Seriously - you think that because a family is in affordable housing that they are not the "right kind of people whose kids will fit in and know how to behave in school?" I don't know you, so I won't call you a racist, but you sure seem to be using the code words properly. And I would tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself, but you have already demonstrated that you have no capacity for shame.

[Anonymous]

ObserverCollege wrote:My partner works in development circles, and saw a memo showing that a nonprofit is getting ready to build a 10-story "mixed-income" condo development a block away from us (and our single-family home!!!). We moved where we did because we wanted to be near transit yet also in an excellent school district for our children.

Obviously we're highly concerned, as we never envisioned something like this happening where we are. We're certainly in favor of affordable housing, but we would prefer a smaller-scale project that fits the neighborhood, with ALL the units in the building made affordable. That way we'd end up with maybe 4 units of senior housing in a 2-story building coupled with a beautiful new park, rather than 40 or so all-ages units in a 10-story building. I would also imagine that there are other areas where the land costs are more reasonable, if in fact this developer actually cares about affordable housing. Furthermore, with 40 units it would be hard to make them all for the senior population. Thus, we worry about how good the screening will be to find the right kind of people whose kids will fit in and know how to behave in school, given that the developer is trying to fill 40+ units for these people.
Does anyone have any thoughts as to what to do to make sure the county does the right thing? I understand about talking to your neighbors, organizing, speaking at hearings, etc. But does that really work? My partner says in development that time is money, and that the best strategy is to be ready to go to the courts to slow down the process. He says even if you're not serious about winning the lawsuit, if you slow down the process enough that construction costs rise and tax credits expire so maybe this thing won't be built.

Does anyone have ideas as to how we could battle this out at the local level? A friend suggested some concerned citizens in Arlington have been battling the County over such a railroaded project, and have nearly made it collapse a couple of times through delays and whatnot. I just think of my partner and our two children, and how our lives would change so much for the worse if the wrong type of construction goes in near us.

Thank you so much.

Orlando

How does the construction project affect the reasons that you chose the area in the first place. Will it affect your access to public transportation, will it impact the quality of the school. Also, I think you need to eloborate on what you mean by the "right kind of people with kids that will fit in and know how to behave in school", I did not understand that portion of your post.

[Anonymous]

The writer, Orlando, said he's not against affordable housing. He's perfectly willing to have a 4-unit building along with a beautiful park on the property. If he were against affordable housing he would say there should be no affordable housing whatsoever.

Also, the point about the children is a really good one. You just don't want an influx of the wrong kind of kids when your child's education hangs in the balance. In a high-end neighborhood (e.g. Potomac, Lyon Village in Arlington, Great Falls, etc.), you have an involved PTA that funds and pushes for enrichment classes, extra gifted teachers, etc. If you create an "increased demand" for remedial and special education classes, then in these budgetary times you're naturally going to reduce the resources that go toward the gifted program. Plus, these kids might cause some families to pull out of the school, further eroding PTA funds and the parents' political muscle. It becomes a vicious cycle.

Best thing to do is to try a pilot program, where maybe you let one of the 4 senior apartments have their grandchild live with them. Keep a close eye on the child over the next ten years or so and see how that one child does. If s/he manages to avoid getting sent to juvenile hall, then perhaps when s/he graduates you consider a 4-plex where one of the 4 units is dedicated to a family of 4 who earn the median income. Wait through the K-12 cycles for those children, and if things work out then maybe you get a little more ambitious.

Just don't rush things the way these developers seem to want. They push to get the government funding to let these people live in such a nice community (walkable to Metro) all at once, but then they don't provide the resources to deal with their presence year after year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The writer, Orlando, said he's not against affordable housing. He's perfectly willing to have a 4-unit building along with a beautiful park on the property. If he were against affordable housing he would say there should be no affordable housing whatsoever.

Also, the point about the children is a really good one. You just don't want an influx of the wrong kind of kids when your child's education hangs in the balance. In a high-end neighborhood (e.g. Potomac, Lyon Village in Arlington, Great Falls, etc.), you have an involved PTA that funds and pushes for enrichment classes, extra gifted teachers, etc. If you create an "increased demand" for remedial and special education classes, then in these budgetary times you're naturally going to reduce the resources that go toward the gifted program. Plus, these kids might cause some families to pull out of the school, further eroding PTA funds and the parents' political muscle. It becomes a vicious cycle.

Best thing to do is to try a pilot program, where maybe you let one of the 4 senior apartments have their grandchild live with them. Keep a close eye on the child over the next ten years or so and see how that one child does. If s/he manages to avoid getting sent to juvenile hall, then perhaps when s/he graduates you consider a 4-plex where one of the 4 units is dedicated to a family of 4 who earn the median income. Wait through the K-12 cycles for those children, and if things work out then maybe you get a little more ambitious.

Just don't rush things the way these developers seem to want. They push to get the government funding to let these people live in such a nice community (walkable to Metro) all at once, but then they don't provide the resources to deal with their presence year after year.

My sarcasm detector must need new batteries - I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be tongue-in-cheek or not. If it is - bravo, it's brilliant. If not - Wow. Just wow.

[Anonymous]

My sarcasm detector must need new batteries - I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be tongue-in-cheek or not. If it is - bravo, it's brilliant. If not - Wow. Just wow.

my thoughts too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The writer, Orlando, said he's not against affordable housing. He's perfectly willing to have a 4-unit building along with a beautiful park on the property. If he were against affordable housing he would say there should be no affordable housing whatsoever.

Ha! He's ok with four properly screened grandparents! You call that support for public housing!?

If you want to pick your neighbors you should live in a gated community with proper bylaws or a swank nyc coop. Otherwise cry me a river.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Does anyone have any thoughts as to what to do to make sure the county does the right thing?"

Yes, indeed - the county should utterly refuse to entertain complaints from NIMBY elitists like yourself. Seriously - you think that because a family is in affordable housing that they are not the "right kind of people whose kids will fit in and know how to behave in school?" I don't know you, so I won't call you a racist, but you sure seem to be using the code words properly. And I would tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself, but you have already demonstrated that you have no capacity for shame.

OP, it sounds like the county is doing the right thing. Enforcing low housing density around transit hubs would be hugely socially irresponsible and a giant step backward for the whole region.

I think people should be able to advocate for the kind of neighborhood they want in their backyards, but you're clearly stuck in the last century on this one. Get used to having more neighbors or move further from Metro, or find yourself an extreme exurb where you can have all the elbow room you want, unchallenged.

[Anonymous]

OP - poor people have to live somewhere. Sometimes *gasp in horror* near you. Worse yet, they will live there with their children!

[Anonymous]

There is low income housing in places you don't even know about. It is typically such a nonissue, once the thing is built and everyone moves onto the next thing to complain about. People without money are not bad. It's large areas of poverty that attracts criminals. Low income families in good neighborhoods end up making good neighbors.

[Anonymous]

OP - poor people have to live somewhere. Sometimes *gasp in horror* near you. Worse yet, they will live there with their children!

Right, but everyone knows poor people are supposed to live in DC. That's the natural order of things after all. That way suburbanites get to rest on their laurels and throw stones at DC's dysfunctional government, "Why don't you get your shit together like McLean!?!"

Um, because a massive percentage of our citizens live below the poverty line, and come from 10 generations of poverty and dysfunction. Thanks for asking though!

[Anonymous]

What is the name of the development? I will look it up.

Usually 10-story condos go on major thoroughfares or next to other 10 story projects. If you live a block from Connecticut Avenue, then you should expect some denser development. NIMBY's suck - you moved there so you could walk to stuff, but don't want to have more stuff to walk to now, and don't want more people to live there too.

Don't expect a park if the alternative is a 10 story building. Seriously. That doesn't happen in a city very often. If you want to live next to a park, move to Greenbelt.

You guess correctly - developers just want to make money. If they are advertising this will be a mixed income development, then the "mixed" part is solely because the DC Planning Office has suggested it, and the developers are getting added density as a result.

Maybe I didn't read your post correctly, but mixed income doesn't usually mean age-restricted. So the age of the tenant or owner won't matter for a mixed income property. Usually in a mixed income property, there is an affordable housing component. Usually its maybe 20% of the units (the rest are market, or rather for rich people like you), which sometimes aren't all that low-income anyway. Sometimes its 80% of the average median income of the neighborhood. In DC, that can mean people who make $75,000, which is still more than 80%-90% of the US population. Even if some units are maxed out at 60% of the AMI, you're usually talking about a family that makes $40,000+. Maybe even a teacher at your child's school, for example, although they might not make enough to live in your mixed income project. God forbid a teacher should live near students.

[Anonymous]

The problem is when the neighborhood gets swamped. For example, in Lyon Village in Arlington a block from the Clarendon Metro there's a mixed-income apartment property being built ON TOP of a CHURCH. Rather than sell the land to someone who can afford it, the church imposed its values upon everyone else. The County got itself involved too through work with the nonprofit developer, thinking that somehow getting affordable units a block from the Metro is more important than a neighborhood's longstanding character.

Since 2004 there have been truly valiant efforts by the Lyon Village neighbors to stop this monstrosity. A handful of neighbors have served as plaintiffs on multiple rounds of lawsuits to derail this project. The plaintiffs include a civil rights attorney at DOJ, a respected financial planner, and others who regularly donate their time to PTA and other causes. Their efforts have been absolutely heroic, as the development and litigation costs have risen so much that at times it appeared the project would collapse.

Unfortunately, despite one more lawsuit that hasn't been fully heard yet, it appears construction is proceeding. Obviously, we all hope legal action can continue long enough so that some tax credit expires and the project fails. Nevertheless, I hope this doesn't discourage Orlando or those others who want only the best for their neighbors and their children. Boys and girls should be able to plant tomatoes in their gardens without having to adjust for a different level of sunlight. Neighbors should be able to walk home from Whole Foods or Cheesecake Factory in peace, without worrying that a teacher rushing out of her "affordable" apartment to her school play doesn't startle said neighbors. Parents shouldn't have to worry about the type of kids police officers host as Big Brothers in the apartment building's new party room.

I weep for the neighbors of this development. But fear not, residents of Lyon Village. We must push forward for the sake of the neighborhood. Remember that the work begins anew, the hope continues, and the dream lives on.