Anonymous
10/17/2019 21:38
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m with you OP.
I like this area the way it is. We don’t need more development, especially when it comes with less green space.
I think that’s the issue for many people. More development, but not better facilities (parks, libraries).
Why does the County want to pave over every speck of green space and cover it with high density housing? People need trees and parks.
That is why there needs to be more density where areas are already developed, to save the green space that everyone cherishes. Not everyone needs to live in a single family home. The most dense cities in the world barely have any. It is a very wasteful use of land.
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
+1 million
Weird that people in Bethesda don't think there are parks nearby - they are all over the place.
Norwood, Little Falls, Battery Lane, Elm Street, the park on Newdale - are you really not aware of all of these within comfortable walking distance of downtown?
Then there is the wasteful and inaccessible green space of the 3 country clubs in Bethesda.
But best of all once the Purple Line is done most of Bethesda will have a protected way to get to Rock Creek Park on foot/bike and well RCP is just massive.
So no you don't need to get on 270 to get to a park if you live in Bethesda - most likely you don't even need your car though obviously most people in Bethesda drive even to things they should be walking to because solving the worlds problems is for other people.
Anonymous
10/17/2019 16:06
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Increasing density has become this fetish on the left. Apparently it solves everything. Someone should go to NYC and see how it’s working for them.
Seriously.
This is all we hear about in MoCo. More density is the answer. Such BS.
Will housing costs really go down? Hasn't been the case in NYC.
Imagine you built a million new condo units in Manhattan. Would that make housing there affordable? Or at least cheaper than it is now?
Imagine you tore down 300,000 units in Manhattan. Would that make Manhattan cheaper? More expensive?
Anonymous
10/17/2019 16:04
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Increasing density has become this fetish on the left. Apparently it solves everything. Someone should go to NYC and see how it’s working for them.
Seriously.
This is all we hear about in MoCo. More density is the answer. Such BS.
Will housing costs really go down? Hasn't been the case in NYC.
Imagine you built a million new condo units in Manhattan. Would that make housing there affordable? Or at least cheaper than it is now?
It would put downward pressure on prices because there would be more supply. But if prices actually went down compared to what they would have been otherwise, then demand would go up too (this is the part of the equation that upzoning people conveniently ignore). All the people in the outer boroughs and in New Jersey who have terrible commutes would snap them up, as would people currently living in Austin or Iowa or Maine who want to live in NYC but don't because they couldn't previously afford it. That would drive housing prices back up. The result would be no change in housing prices, and an even more crowded Manhattan.
The issue here isn't supply -- it's desirability. Places where everyone wants to live are always going to be expensive.
Ironically, perhaps given the rhetoric, it's the least densely populated places in this country that are the cheapest places to live -- you can buy a house in Des Moines for $150,000 -- and the most densely populated areas are the most expensive. Because the issue is desirability.
Er common econ 101 error.
Demand doesn't go up because you build more units and prices go down.
The quantity demanded goes up (the demand curve is the curve of quantity demanded at each price point).
You are not shifting the demand curve, you are moving along the demand curve.
With a normal downward sloping demand curve the equilibrium price will decrease. HOW MUCH will depend on the "elasticity of demand"
Yes if demand is very elastic - if a small reduction in price means a large increase in quantity demanded - then the decrease in price will be very minimal. If its inelastic than the reduction will be large.
Demand elasticity for a particular neighborhood is likely quite large. Build more units on the UES, and you draw people from the UWS, Brooklyn, etc.
Demand for NYC period is likely much less elastic. Lots of people living in the suburbs of NYC do not WANT to live in the City, or work in the suburbs. Of course to the extent people DO move from the suburbs of NYC to Manhattan, that will lower prices in the suburbs.
Demand for greater NYC like even less elastic.
Someone in Iowa does not have a JOB in NYC. They are simply not that interchangeable.
And yes, low density areas are sometimes expensive. Boulder Colo, for example. High density areas not always.
Yes, of course desirability matters. Thats just saying demand matters AS WELL AS SUPPLY.
But added supply can certainly matter. Even in dense desirable places
https://www.vox.com/2016/8/8/12390048/san-francisco-housing-costs-tokyo
Anonymous
10/17/2019 15:53
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
There are parks in Bethesda.
Density gives you more room for parks than a bunch of R90 and up sfh.
Anonymous
10/17/2019 09:34
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:There's tons of affordable housing in PG county. Funny how everyone seems to want to ignore that.
Yes, there is. But there aren't tons of jobs. I don't think it's a good strategy, either for the region or for individual household budgets, to tell people to go buy affordable housing in Prince George's County and then spend hours and $$$ per day on the roads commuting.
Anonymous
10/17/2019 00:37
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I live in Bethesda and work in DC. I don't understand why we need ever greater density and more homes and more companies to come to the area. The congestion is terrible and the strain on schools and public services is annoying.
Personally, I would be happier if we stayed flat or, better yet, some people moved away!
+1
I'd be in favor of decreasing density. DC is already one of the most densely populated places in America.
Fewer condos, more parks!
DC has the highest percentage of parkland of any medium or large city in the US - we are blessed with parks of all sizes in DC. And one of reasons condos work in DC is because we have some fabulous parks for those folks to walk to and utilize.
Mmmm I beg to differ.. I am from DC and while I think we are a 'green city" (tree canopy) I don't think the park situation is that great. We have lots of small, up to date playgrounds due to Fenty's investment in parks and rec--but in terms of larger parks for sport and recreation and gathering, not so much. For example, I don't think Rock Creek is on par with central park. It's just not usable in the same way. It's so wild it's more 'to look at' than utilize. As a woman, I would never go for a solo run there.
I don't know how you can live in DC and think it doesn't have parks - DC is second only to NY by percentage of land that is parkland:
http://cloud.tpl.org/pubs/ccpe_Acreage_and_Employees_Data_2010.pdf
From large parks like Rock Creek Park, Glover Archibold, the Arboretum & Kenilworth Gardens, Fort Duport and Fort Circle, Oxon Run and of course the National Mall to mid size neighborhood parks which are scattered all over the city to the thousands of little pocket parks all over the city DC is really blessed with a variety of parks.
And maybe you don't get out but DC also has lots of usable parks too - baseball and soccer fields, basketball and tennis courts, parks with swimming pools etc.
And I really wonder if you've ever spent any time at all in Rock Creek Park (or are maybe a troll) but Rock Creek Park, like Central Park, is not just completely designed and engineered but both were designed by the Olmsteads.
Sure Rock Creek Park doesn't have as many playing fields and skews more towards running and hiking trails (which is fantastic) but there are in fact playgrounds, picnic areas, playing fields, tennis courts, a stable, historic resources and even a zoo. And FWIW the park statistically is very safe and it may be scary to you but it doesn't seem to be to most women who appear to be using the park as much as men are.
Anonymous
10/17/2019 00:24
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m with you OP.
I like this area the way it is. We don’t need more development, especially when it comes with less green space.
I think that’s the issue for many people. More development, but not better facilities (parks, libraries).
Why does the County want to pave over every speck of green space and cover it with high density housing? People need trees and parks.
That is why there needs to be more density where areas are already developed, to save the green space that everyone cherishes. Not everyone needs to live in a single family home. The most dense cities in the world barely have any. It is a very wasteful use of land.
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
+1 million
Weird that people in Bethesda don't think there are parks nearby - they are all over the place.
Norwood, Little Falls, Battery Lane, Elm Street, the park on Newdale - are you really not aware of all of these within comfortable walking distance of downtown?
Then there is the wasteful and inaccessible green space of the 3 country clubs in Bethesda.
But best of all once the Purple Line is done most of Bethesda will have a protected way to get to Rock Creek Park on foot/bike and well RCP is just massive.
So no you don't need to get on 270 to get to a park if you live in Bethesda - most likely you don't even need your car though obviously most people in Bethesda drive even to things they should be walking to because solving the worlds problems is for other people.
Anonymous
10/16/2019 09:58
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
There's tons of affordable housing in PG county. Funny how everyone seems to want to ignore that.
Anonymous
10/16/2019 09:46
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m with you OP.
I like this area the way it is. We don’t need more development, especially when it comes with less green space.
I think that’s the issue for many people. More development, but not better facilities (parks, libraries).
Why does the County want to pave over every speck of green space and cover it with high density housing? People need trees and parks.
That is why there needs to be more density where areas are already developed, to save the green space that everyone cherishes. Not everyone needs to live in a single family home. The most dense cities in the world barely have any. It is a very wasteful use of land.
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
+1 million
Anonymous
10/16/2019 07:46
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
There are parks in Bethesda.
Anonymous
10/15/2019 22:47
Subject: Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m with you OP.
I like this area the way it is. We don’t need more development, especially when it comes with less green space.
I think that’s the issue for many people. More development, but not better facilities (parks, libraries).
Why does the County want to pave over every speck of green space and cover it with high density housing? People need trees and parks.
That is why there needs to be more density where areas are already developed, to save the green space that everyone cherishes. Not everyone needs to live in a single family home. The most dense cities in the world barely have any. It is a very wasteful use of land.
PP, no! People living in increasingly dense areas like Bethesda need green space too. What are we supposed to do? Drive up 270 to the Ag Reserve?
Anonymous
10/13/2019 18:38
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, if you don’t like this area’s growth then help contribute and move out of the area please. Smart growth means building infrastructure ahead of the anticipated growth. Other than that, growth is inevitable for an area like DC metro. Drive south and west beyond PW and Loudoun counties and you already see those next counties looking like PW and Loudoun did 20 years ago. It is coming and it is unstoppable. Just have to deal with it.
Why do the people who want change get to determine who stays and who goes? Shouldn't the people who have lived here longer have more influence than the people who you want to welcome?
Nope. We're equal.
But you don't treat those with concerns equally. You tell them "It's my way, or the highway!" Your vision for our area is no more valid or correct than those who want to limit growth.
I don't determine who stays or who goes. I just say we should find ways to have more people here. You want to live somewhere with less people. I got a solution for you...
Anonymous
10/13/2019 13:12
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, if you don’t like this area’s growth then help contribute and move out of the area please. Smart growth means building infrastructure ahead of the anticipated growth. Other than that, growth is inevitable for an area like DC metro. Drive south and west beyond PW and Loudoun counties and you already see those next counties looking like PW and Loudoun did 20 years ago. It is coming and it is unstoppable. Just have to deal with it.
Why do the people who want change get to determine who stays and who goes? Shouldn't the people who have lived here longer have more influence than the people who you want to welcome?
Nope. We're equal.
But you don't treat those with concerns equally. You tell them "It's my way, or the highway!" Your vision for our area is no more valid or correct than those who want to limit growth.
You: I don't think that more housing should be built for the people who are moving here.
Me (not the PP): I think that more housing should be built for the people who are moving here.
It's not really possible to compromise on that, is it? I mean, if you wanted to talk about where the housing should or shouldn't be built, or what kind of housing it should or shouldn't be, that would be one thing. But if your position is that there shouldn't be any more housing (maybe you're hoping that if there isn't any more housing, then people won't move here), I really don't know how to reach agreement with you.
Anonymous
10/12/2019 23:16
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, if you don’t like this area’s growth then help contribute and move out of the area please. Smart growth means building infrastructure ahead of the anticipated growth. Other than that, growth is inevitable for an area like DC metro. Drive south and west beyond PW and Loudoun counties and you already see those next counties looking like PW and Loudoun did 20 years ago. It is coming and it is unstoppable. Just have to deal with it.
Why do the people who want change get to determine who stays and who goes? Shouldn't the people who have lived here longer have more influence than the people who you want to welcome?
Nope. We're equal.
But you don't treat those with concerns equally. You tell them "It's my way, or the highway!" Your vision for our area is no more valid or correct than those who want to limit growth.
Anonymous
10/12/2019 09:17
Subject: Re:Why is "growth" good? I'd like fewer people in the area
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Increasing density has become this fetish on the left. Apparently it solves everything. Someone should go to NYC and see how it’s working for them.
Seriously.
This is all we hear about in MoCo. More density is the answer. Such BS.
Will housing costs really go down? Hasn't been the case in NYC.
Imagine you built a million new condo units in Manhattan. Would that make housing there affordable? Or at least cheaper than it is now?
It would put downward pressure on prices because there would be more supply. But if prices actually went down compared to what they would have been otherwise, then demand would go up too (this is the part of the equation that upzoning people conveniently ignore). All the people in the outer boroughs and in New Jersey who have terrible commutes would snap them up, as would people currently living in Austin or Iowa or Maine who want to live in NYC but don't because they couldn't previously afford it. That would drive housing prices back up. The result would be no change in housing prices, and an even more crowded Manhattan.
The issue here isn't supply -- it's desirability. Places where everyone wants to live are always going to be expensive.
Ironically, perhaps given the rhetoric, it's the least densely populated places in this country that are the cheapest places to live -- you can buy a house in Des Moines for $150,000 -- and the most densely populated areas are the most expensive. Because the issue is desirability.