Reply to MoCo Planning Board Meeting

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "MoCo Planning Board Meeting - Upzoning"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Lots of tendentious arguments here about cities none of us live in.

You could, instead, just look around DC. Neighborhoods where the housing stock has greatly increased over the past decade or so have gotten a lot more expensive, not less expensive.

Look at Navy Yard. Look at U Street. Look at 14th Street. Look at H Street. Look at Shaw. Look at Logan Circle....

[/quote]
Reasoning from a price change: rookie mistake![/quote]

[b]I don't know why everyone decided to replace the word "gentrification" with "upzoning."[/b] It's the same thing (and, no, just because you *wish* we could build giant apartment buildings in Georgetown doesn't change that). No one doubted what gentrification did to housing prices, and no one should think the result will be any different just because you've relabeled gentrification as "upzoning."

[/quote]

The reason you don't know why is because it didn't happen. They are different things. There might be upzoning and then gentrification, but gentrification can also happen without upzoning, and guess what? Upzoning can also happen without gentrification.[/quote]

Uh, sure, in theory. In reality, it basically only happens in ungentrified areas. How else is DC getting so incredibly white? Because developers buy homes from black people and turn them into luxury condos they then sell to white people. [/quote]

Obviously gentrification only happens in ungentrified areas. How would you go about gentrifying an area that is already gentrified?

DC is currently 38% non-Hispanic white.[/quote]

What is odd here is that those supporting upzoning generally opposed gentrification.  They in reality are the same-changing the character of a neighborhood against the wishes of its residents.[/quote]

While that might be true, the momentum is on the side of the housing advocates, politicians (both R and D who support this), developers, and property investors. All these groups are very well-organized. The current residents of the single family neighborhoods may be opposed to the changes by and large, but they are a smaller group compared with the majority of residents who are renters, and they generally approve of the changes. [/quote]

I disagree that the residents and homeowners who are against these zoning reforms are usually the smaller groups; they are less organized than the YIMBYs. [b]Most people have jobs and family responsibilities so they cannot devote a bunch time to advocating against local zoning changes they disagree with.[/b] The economic benefits that accrue to the groups advocating for these zoning reforms are much more concentrated than the costs imposed on county residents opposed to the reforms. There is an asymmetric advantage for special interest groups (real estate industry, developers, construction companies) that provides them with greater financial return on advocating for zoning reforms even though they are largely unpopular with the general public. There is generally an asymmetric advantage to lobbying that favors special interest groups over voters' preferences. [/quote]

Eh. The people who advocate FOR the local zoning changes also have jobs and family responsibilities. For as much as you want to think this is an issue of special interest groups vs. the general public - it's just not true.[/quote]

Of course it's special interest politics. [b]Average people do not want any of this.[/b] Special interest groups, whether they're the NRA or the upzoning people, always have an advantage because the people opposed to their agenda generally speaking are not organized. [/quote]

It blows my mind that the argument is now that the wealthy homeowners are the ones without power and influence.....because they are just too busy.  SFH zoning exists BECAUSE of the historic and prolonged imbalance of power in our favor.  Now that some of us are lending our voices in support of more housing, it is assumed that we aren't "average people" or that we are somehow bought and paid for.  It is the people struggling with housing insecurity that do not have the time to organize.  SFH owners have HOAs and disposable time and historic preservation organizations to advocate for the status quo, in addition to more free time to organize. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics