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

[Anonymous]

The report doesn't make any specific recommendations and is not a proposal so you don't know that any of the crap you've been dropping in this thread will ever be proposed.

I've generally noted that when people start cursing and flexing anonymous social media muscles that they have no idea what they are really talking about. They simply enjoy flexing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope you are wrong.

First of all you changed what I've been writing which has been to point out that no single family zones have been proposed for upzoning which remains true - no proposal has been sent anywhere to change the zoning on a single family lot anywhere in DC.

With regards to what has been floated, but not actually proposed, to allow more than single family homes in some zones is a change to the function of buildings in those zones not the form.

You are conflating, no doubt purposely because it suits your purpose here to scare everyone, form and function and suggesting changes that are not proposed.

Please show where in the proposal the form of what can be built in a single family zone is proposed to be changed?

You are correct. NOTHING has been changed at this point. However, all of this has been proposed through the COMP Plan. So I suppose you will always be correct, until it is passed and then you won't be correct. But then it will be too late I suppose.

What is being conflated?

"Please show where in the proposal the form of what can be built in a single family zone is proposed to be changed?" What? I actually have no idea what you are saying here. Not to worry. DCUM editing is not easy. If you are asking again for an example of how single family zoned housing has been proposed to be changed, you are playing a semantics game because we all know that it has not been changed. What has changed is another set of rules that CAN be applied on top of single family zoning which creates the impact that the Mayor wants WITHOUT changing the term Single Family Zoning.

Maybe I misunderstood what you typed. I am not sure. It was not clear to me.

You are being intentionally obtuse as you are counting on no one actually vetting any of your non-sense. But that probably happens a lot when you are sitting alone in your room being paranoid.

DCOP has sent a formal proposal to the DC Council to update the Comp Plan. Presumably at some point this fall, your bleatings here not withstanding, the DC Council will consider the proposal.

DCOP has written a report which they made public 3 weeks ago about what the impacts would be of loosening some of the use restrictions of single family homes within a half mile of Metrorail stations and high frequency bus routes. As there is no formal proposal there is nothing for the DC Council to consider at this time.

You are deliberately conflating the two things because you know that the proposed changes to the Comp Plan potentially impact a relatively small number of people in the city so you are muddying the waters with this non-sense about something that is not a proposal.

Here is one not very in depth article about the REPORT DCOP issued a few weeks ago:

https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/office-of-planning-recommends-gentle-density-in-transit-accessible-corridor/16763

And the actual report:

https://plandc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/Comprehensiveplan/007_Single%20Family%20Housing%20Report.pdf

The report doesn't make any specific recommendations and is not a proposal so you don't know that any of the crap you've been dropping in this thread will ever be proposed.

But I suspect you know that other cities that have loosened up or banned single family zoning have not in other cities changed the form of what can be built but just the function. Which is to say that a building that conforms to the lot occupancy, side yard and rear yard requirements and height limit that in the past could only be a single family home could now be a duplex. Or several condos.

DC essentially took this step 5 years ago when they more or less legalized Accessory Dwelling Units in single family (and semi and detached) zones. Which is to say houses that legally used to only be able to have one dwelling unit can now have two.

The house doesn't change but the units within it would.

But you knew that already and aren't here to clarify things but to conflate them.

Hmmm...I don't think you have read the Comp Plan or the Report. That much is apparent from your musings. You linked the report so I'll spare you linking it again so that you can read its recommendations you could not find, but I'll include the following just in case you missed the term 'recommendations'.

CONCLUSION
This report recommends that the District pursue gentle
density in single-family zones in a targeted manner that
prioritizes neighborhoods that are high-opportunity,
high-cost, or near high-capacity transit. An important
element of this recommendation is ensuring that
the District maintains and grows a supply of familysized units as land uses change from single-family to
multifamily.

So you are arguing it is a proposal and not a report? What you cited doesn't support your argument but whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The report doesn't make any specific recommendations and is not a proposal so you don't know that any of the crap you've been dropping in this thread will ever be proposed.

I've generally noted that when people start cursing and flexing anonymous social media muscles that they have no idea what they are really talking about. They simply enjoy flexing.

LOL - and I've noticed that when people try to substitute cleverness for citations or even sound arguments they are bull$hit artists.

[Anonymous]

Report/proposal?
All of that data is from the Mayor's "Comp Plan" posted to her website, published by her. What is the issue here dude?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm old enough to remember how controversial it was when Safeway came to Petworth.

At the time, liberals were beating their breasts about how terrible it was. They said Safeway was too expensive for the neighborhood, which was then overwhelmingly black. They said it was the vanguard of gentrification, and that it would push out black people and all the whites would come in.

Fast forward to today, and gentrification is far worse today than it was then. But the difference this time, is that no one cares. Liberals not only don't talk about gentrification, they are forceful advocates FOR gentrification. They don't call it that. Now they call it "increasing density" but it's the same thing (back when they still called it gentrification, developers knew they could make a lot more money if only they could build condos everywhere but the city wouldn't let them).

Now the liberals sound like the developers and no one cares about all the black and brown people being pushed out. This story says it's a bigger problem here than anywhere else.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-distri...bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

Corrected link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

People used to be so worried that gentrification was going to steamroll poor black people. Now Democrats are driving the steamroller.

[Anonymous]

Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

Nice red herring.

Read the story:

"In the District, low-income residents are being pushed out of neighborhoods at some of the highest rates in the country, according to the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity, which sought to track demographic and economic changes in neighborhoods in the 50 largest U.S. cities from 2000 to 2016....

In portions of the Kingman Park and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, nearly 75 percent of the low-income populations have vanished, census information shows. In the Navy Yard neighborhood, about 77 percent of residents were identified as low income in 2000. Sixteen years later, that population dropped to 21 percent.

Most of the people pushed out of these economic hot spots are black and low income, according to the data."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

Nice red herring.

Read the story:

"In the District, low-income residents are being pushed out of neighborhoods at some of the highest rates in the country, according to the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity, which sought to track demographic and economic changes in neighborhoods in the 50 largest U.S. cities from 2000 to 2016....

In portions of the Kingman Park and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, nearly 75 percent of the low-income populations have vanished, census information shows. In the Navy Yard neighborhood, about 77 percent of residents were identified as low income in 2000. Sixteen years later, that population dropped to 21 percent.

Most of the people pushed out of these economic hot spots are black and low income, according to the data."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should get rid of bike lanes. Hardly anyone uses them, and riding a bike in the city is really dangerous.

That's silly. Bikes aren't dangerous. Cars are dangerous - and not just to people riding bikes.

There are 359,000 cars registered in DC. How many people in DC ride bicycles? Maybe 500? There's hardly anyone who even rides bicycles in DC.

Riding a bike in DC is really dangerous, and hardly anybody rides a bike!

Huh.

Consider the possibility that reducing the danger (from cars) would increase the number of bike-riders.

What do you mean "hardly anyone rides bicycles?" That can't be true within the district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should get rid of bike lanes. Hardly anyone uses them, and riding a bike in the city is really dangerous.

That's silly. Bikes aren't dangerous. Cars are dangerous - and not just to people riding bikes.

There are 359,000 cars registered in DC. How many people in DC ride bicycles? Maybe 500? There's hardly anyone who even rides bicycles in DC.

Riding a bike in DC is really dangerous, and hardly anybody rides a bike!

Huh.

Consider the possibility that reducing the danger (from cars) would increase the number of bike-riders.

What do you mean "hardly anyone rides bicycles?" That can't be true within the district.

It isn't true. The top PP has an idée fixe about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

Nice red herring.

Read the story:

"In the District, low-income residents are being pushed out of neighborhoods at some of the highest rates in the country, according to the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity, which sought to track demographic and economic changes in neighborhoods in the 50 largest U.S. cities from 2000 to 2016....

In portions of the Kingman Park and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, nearly 75 percent of the low-income populations have vanished, census information shows. In the Navy Yard neighborhood, about 77 percent of residents were identified as low income in 2000. Sixteen years later, that population dropped to 21 percent.

Most of the people pushed out of these economic hot spots are black and low income, according to the data."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

Right and constricting the housing supply only makes the problem worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there many poor black people living in the single-family houses in Spring Valley?

Nice red herring.

Read the story:

"In the District, low-income residents are being pushed out of neighborhoods at some of the highest rates in the country, according to the Institute on Metropolitan Opportunity, which sought to track demographic and economic changes in neighborhoods in the 50 largest U.S. cities from 2000 to 2016....

In portions of the Kingman Park and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, nearly 75 percent of the low-income populations have vanished, census information shows. In the Navy Yard neighborhood, about 77 percent of residents were identified as low income in 2000. Sixteen years later, that population dropped to 21 percent.

Most of the people pushed out of these economic hot spots are black and low income, according to the data."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

Right and constricting the housing supply only makes the problem worse.

Love how liberals in DC have become shills for real estate development corporations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Love how liberals in DC have become shills for real estate development corporations.

"DC needs more housing" doesn't make you a shill for real estate development corporations, it makes you a person who is stating a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't the majority of houses in, say, RF-1 zoned rowhouse neighborhoods still single-family homes? I mean, sure there are some condo conversions and some basement apartments. But we're not talking about huge apartment buildings on residential streets here, because the height and setback limits of R-1 and R-2 zoning will still be in place. This just means that someone can decide to split their house into two units or maybe add an ADU. Which some people will do, and most people won't.

Scary! /s

Setback limits are modified under the plan as well. That was a key component even in the Comp Plan.

At the end of the day, under the new Single Family Zoning proposal in the District of Columbia, you can raze your SFH if it is within that 'walkable' distance to public transportation and build in its stead a taller (would depend on how far you were from the transit route. Taller if you were closer to the road, lower if you were at the half mile point) and closer to the sidewalk (covering a greater percentage of lots size) multi family dwelling in the middle of a SFH zoned neighborhood under the 'gentle density' plan. You would NOT get a highrise bout you would have one lot with one house with one family, now be converted to one lot with eight units (two units per floor for four stories). Would there be anything inherently 'wrong' with this as a one of? No, absolutely not. Would this happening as a concerted effort to increase density change the character of a neighborhood? Absolutely.

But it wouldn't change the character of neighborhoods particularly fast or dramatically, unless you think lots of homeowners are going to just suddenly sell their houses to developers to build eight-unit buildings on them. You'd have one or two eight-unit buildings every few blocks. That wouldn't change a thing in most of the neighborhoods you're talking about, including mine (Tenleytown).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well, that's a relief as I thought new residents might bring cars. We will hang on to ours so we can drive out to the countryside occasionally and see trees and stuff.

I bought an electric car. I like the tech and just thought that I would do my tiny bit as I could. Remove one gas car and replace it with an electric car. Not trying to be preachy. I really don't care what you drive. Anyway, I had the car for six weeks before it got a sticker plastered on its windshield (beginning of pandemic) that said "Roads were not built for cars". Serves me right for not having parked it in the garage that day (another subject of debate in this thread I am sure). Anyway, I had always known it, but the densification lobby and bike lobby and in general 'make you feel guilty' lobby are all the same lobby and it is all about transferring your money into their wallets.

The "ask" is not going to end once you have upzoned your house, sold your cars and bought a bike. They will want to charge you a hookup tax to plug your solar onto the grid once you update your new Multi Family Housing Unit. You want to make it LEED certified. That does not mean it is efficient. That means you have paid an arbitrary certification board that shows up to examine your house in, you guessed it, a Toyota Tacoma.

I have solar. Of course they charge you to hook up to the grid. Otherwise, you would only have electricity during the day, unless you got huge amounts of battery storage.