Is it possible that living in beautiful, low density, low height, historic centrally convenient city isn't a " right"- but something you need to be prepared to pay more for or otherwise qualify for whether in DC or Anacostia (inheritance/ sharing with family/ section 8/ teacher-police officer homebuying incentives, or buying into or renting in transitional neighborhoods)?

More supply is needed to meet demand.

When NIMBYs fight development, delay them for years and force smaller, shorter buldings with fewer units, then yes, NIMBYs directly impact the housing opportunity. Curtailin supply spikes prices.

If there were 100,000 more units in DC today, they would be less expensive than what we have.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

LOL Nimbys have not caused a housing crisis. That's hilarious.

So with confidence you believe that housing supply in Washington DC is keeping up with demand?

This housing supply/demand 'crisis' is a bit overblown. Look no further than Cathedral Commons, on Cleveland Park's doorstep, which sold itself as a walkable, "transit-oriented" development when it got zoning approvals.

According to this local real estate business website, Cathedral Commons has a vacancy rate of 30 percent, several years after opening. It supposed to have 10 percent 'affordable' units. And this transit-oriented development is -- wait for it -- using a luxury car promotion to attract tenants to the project. You can't make this stuff up.

https://www.bisnow.com/washington-dc/news/multifamily/developer-rolls-out-luxury-car-promotion-in-bid-to-attract-tenants-49344

A hodge podge of nonsense to respond to here.

Do you know that the IZ units are un-rented? As I understand it all of the cities IZ rental units are occupied and there is a long waitlist for them.

As for the luxury car promotion they are offering free test drives. Which seems like a stupid promotion because anyone can get a free test drive and I doubt that would appeal as much of an amenity to people living in housing in a multi-unit building.

And maybe that explains the problems with the rentals - their rents could be too high and their ham handed promotions aren't helping. If their rents are too high (and $7800 for a townhouse is too high) then eventually they will have to lower them until they find tenants. Which has been happening with lots of other buildings in DC and it is actually a good thing as rents have fallen a bit because of competition but there is no evidence that occupancy rates have fallen.

Alternately maybe no one wants to be your neighbor - who could blame them for wanting to stay away from people with money but no common sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

LOL Nimbys have not caused a housing crisis. That's hilarious.

So with confidence you believe that housing supply in Washington DC is keeping up with demand?

This housing supply/demand 'crisis' is a bit overblown. Look no further than Cathedral Commons, on Cleveland Park's doorstep, which sold itself as a walkable, "transit-oriented" development when it got zoning approvals.

According to this local real estate business website, Cathedral Commons has a vacancy rate of 30 percent, several years after opening. It supposed to have 10 percent 'affordable' units. And this transit-oriented development is -- wait for it -- using a luxury car promotion to attract tenants to the project. You can't make this stuff up.

https://www.bisnow.com/washington-dc/news/multifamily/developer-rolls-out-luxury-car-promotion-in-bid-to-attract-tenants-49344

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

LOL Nimbys have not caused a housing crisis. That's hilarious.

So with confidence you believe that housing supply in Washington DC is keeping up with demand?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

LOL Nimbys have not caused a housing crisis. That's hilarious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

This.

On this thread and others on DCUM when GGW is criticized I've challenged NIMBY's to go cite (and provide URL's) that show this supposed pro developer bias. There are in fact many blog posts on there (including one today) that are pretty critical of both developers and specific developments.

And the paranoid folks coming on here making false claims about GGW know this and are counting on others to not actually go to the blog and read what is on there.

Anonymous wrote:Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

GGW is[i] the counter group to the entrenched NIMBYs that have essentially caused the housing crisis that exists today.

Thanks - I'm going to visit the site and keep a better eye on them. Reclaimed bourbon wood - funny DDD
Is there any counter group, or is it just that neighbors need to mobilize against these profit crazed development pushers?

Anonymous wrote:Well said. I wish I could understand their motivation though. Is it simply profit? Yes, an old, well trafikked and lively strip mall is actually quaint and worth preserving.

Some of the GrGrWa bloggers posting from their mama’s basement may earnestly believe that if we build a lot taller and denser in DC, they one day will find affordable hipster flats with reclaimed bourbon barrel trim on U Street.

More senior GrGrWa staff are simply carrying water for their profit-hungry funders, the large development corporations, zoning law firms, and planning consultants. Some of these major funders are disclosed on the website.

Well said. I wish I could understand their motivation though. Is it simply profit? Yes, an old, well trafikked and lively strip mall is actually quaint and worth preserving.

I know that GGW bloggers and the smart growth echo chamber fantasize about curtailing the Cleveland Park Historic District and upzoning the neighborhood. But it's just that, their fantasy. DC has added over 100,000 residents and is building new neighborhoods, most in formerly industrial areas where little more than decrepit warehouses and parking lots existed and where few existing residents are displaced. It would be unprecedented to roll back an historic district. Those who want to fundamentally change this "village in the city" -- or Palisades or Chevy Chase DC for that matter -- are advocating for a form of urban renewal that would transform the character of neighborhoods. That would be as unwarranted and unwelcome today as it was in the 60s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the ship has sailed with adding housing and density to the Cleveland Park library. But there is another major public project in the planning stages, Eaton Elementary School, where a mixed-use, public-private partnership is a possibility. If the wing toward Macomb St is rebuilt, there could be several floors of housing on top, including affordable units. This would help to maintain school diversity, while providing socio-economic diversity in the middle of Cleveland Park. Let's make this win-win opportunity happen.

I am one of the staunch so-called pro-development posters.

John Eaton is not a good PPP candidate, IMO - the location is not like Janney and the Tenleytown library, which are right on Wisconsin Ave. In the case of Eaton, the DCPS needs to figure out the best and maximum way to provide an excellent campus and school building for the students.

Isn't it also in a historic district? Wouldn't that make such a plan exceedingly difficult to pull off?

Not only is it in the historic district, it was actually the cornerstone of the application for recognition of the historic district. And is one square block.

The Park-N-Shop is actually the cornerstone of the Historic District. It was the reason the effort was made to create it.

Ah yes Cleveland Park's historic strip mall! Where would America, and Cleveland Park, be without the strip mall!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the ship has sailed with adding housing and density to the Cleveland Park library. But there is another major public project in the planning stages, Eaton Elementary School, where a mixed-use, public-private partnership is a possibility. If the wing toward Macomb St is rebuilt, there could be several floors of housing on top, including affordable units. This would help to maintain school diversity, while providing socio-economic diversity in the middle of Cleveland Park. Let's make this win-win opportunity happen.

I am one of the staunch so-called pro-development posters.

John Eaton is not a good PPP candidate, IMO - the location is not like Janney and the Tenleytown library, which are right on Wisconsin Ave. In the case of Eaton, the DCPS needs to figure out the best and maximum way to provide an excellent campus and school building for the students.

Isn't it also in a historic district? Wouldn't that make such a plan exceedingly difficult to pull off?

Not only is it in the historic district, it was actually the cornerstone of the application for recognition of the historic district. And is one square block.

The Park-N-Shop is actually the cornerstone of the Historic District. It was the reason the effort was made to create it.

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, the ship has sailed with adding housing and density to the Cleveland Park library. But there is another major public project in the planning stages, Eaton Elementary School, where a mixed-use, public-private partnership is a possibility. If the wing toward Macomb St is rebuilt, there could be several floors of housing on top, including affordable units. This would help to maintain school diversity, while providing socio-economic diversity in the middle of Cleveland Park. Let's make this win-win opportunity happen.

Troll