Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The houses are charming 1920s houses though. Such a shame. My prediction is that developers would raze them and build mcmansions (still for single family) that fill the lots with little squiggles of green between. Kind of like that neighborhood by Foxhall.

I can't imagine a lot of circumstances where a boulder wouldn't make more money replacing 1 unit with 2 units (or 3 or 4) - if it were allowed, and if the demand is there. And the demand is there.

Why are builders knocking down colonials and building McMansions all across Bethesda/Chevy Chase?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The houses are charming 1920s houses though. Such a shame. My prediction is that developers would raze them and build mcmansions (still for single family) that fill the lots with little squiggles of green between. Kind of like that neighborhood by Foxhall.

I can't imagine a lot of circumstances where a boulder wouldn't make more money replacing 1 unit with 2 units (or 3 or 4) - if it were allowed, and if the demand is there. And the demand is there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help poor people. Or middle-income people. And it will actively hurt anyone with children. But it might help single white dudes who really want to live in neighborhoods they otherwise could not afford.

Please, let's think of the single white dudes, for once. They really, really want to live close to the bar.

That's silly, PP. When there are more housing units in areas where people want to live, then more people can live in those areas. Of course that will help middle-income people, people with children, and middle-income people with children. There's no divine decree that children must live in detached houses.

There's a life cycle to housing.

People who are young and single don't need much space. When people get married, they don't need much more space, though they'd probably like some. When people have children, now they need space. If they have a lot of children, they really need a lot of space. When those children grow up and move away, they don't need as much space anymore.

Replacing single-family homes with apartments and condos helps people who 1. don't have children or 2. whose children have grown up and moved away because it will make apartments and condos cheaper. It hurts people with children, because they need lots of space, and removing single-family homes will send the price of the ones that remain to the moon. Why do you think so many people leave NYC when they have children? (Look at how much single-family homes cost in NYC).

You can say "well those people can lump it and go live in a condo." (It's always easier to demand someone else sacrifices, isn't it? Especially when you benefit from their sacrifices)

And I can say "well, no one has a divine decree to live anywhere, and if you don't like DC, you're welcome to move somewhere else."

+1.

This is an issue in a lot of places. See here:

"In Seattle, even before you get to the paramount parental question of schools, the question of housing looms large for families. There’s just not enough of it to go around. There’s lots of new construction, but it’s coming at the expense of single-family homes, which until recently were a Seattle staple. It might be great for a certain stage of life, but most people don’t want to raise their kids in microapartments -- sometimes called “apodments” in Seattle -- above cocktail bars or e-cig lounges. “It keeps dollars per square foot up, so it makes perfect financial sense,” says Tyler McKenzie, president of the Seattle King County Association of Realtors, “but it’s going to drive families away.”

https://www.governing.com/topics/urban/gov-seattle-kids-gentrification-series.html

Anonymous wrote:Having done it, it is hard to live with young kids in an apartment, even if there are parks nearby. The noise tends to cause friction with neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:Having done it, it is hard to live with young kids in an apartment, even if there are parks nearby. The noise tends to cause friction with neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help poor people. Or middle-income people. And it will actively hurt anyone with children. But it might help single white dudes who really want to live in neighborhoods they otherwise could not afford.

Please, let's think of the single white dudes, for once. They really, really want to live close to the bar.

That's silly, PP. When there are more housing units in areas where people want to live, then more people can live in those areas. Of course that will help middle-income people, people with children, and middle-income people with children. There's no divine decree that children must live in detached houses.

There's a life cycle to housing.

People who are young and single don't need much space. When people get married, they don't need much more space, though they'd probably like some. When people have children, now they need space. If they have a lot of children, they really need a lot of space. When those children grow up and move away, they don't need as much space anymore.

Replacing single-family homes with apartments and condos helps people who 1. don't have children or 2. whose children have grown up and moved away because it will make apartments and condos cheaper. It hurts people with children, because they need lots of space, and removing single-family homes will send the price of the ones that remain to the moon. Why do you think so many people leave NYC when they have children? (Look at how much single-family homes cost in NYC).

You can say "well those people can lump it and go live in a condo." (It's always easier to demand someone else sacrifices, isn't it? Especially when you benefit from their sacrifices)

And I can say "well, no one has a divine decree to live anywhere, and if you don't like DC, you're welcome to move somewhere else."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's a life cycle to housing.

People who are young and single don't need much space. When people get married, they don't need much more space, though they'd probably like some. When people have children, now they need space. If they have a lot of children, they really need a lot of space. When those children grow up and move away, they don't need as much space anymore.

Replacing single-family homes with apartments and condos helps people who 1. don't have children or 2. whose children have grown up and moved away because it will make apartments and condos cheaper. It hurts people with children, because they need lots of space, and removing single-family homes will send the price of the ones that remain to the moon. Why do you think so many people leave NYC when they have children? (Look at how much single-family homes cost in NYC).

You can say "well those people can lump it and go live in a condo." (It's always easier to demand someone else sacrifices, isn't it? Especially when you benefit from their sacrifices)

And I can say "well, no one has a divine decree to live anywhere, and if you don't like DC, you're welcome to move somewhere else."

There is a life cycle to housing - first it's new, then it's not so new, then it's old.

You're not talking about that, though. You're talking about people's housing needs and wants. And you're assuming that's everyone's housing needs and wants are the same as yours. But they're not.

Thank you for your very infantile response. I can tell you've put a lot of thought into this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's a life cycle to housing.

People who are young and single don't need much space. When people get married, they don't need much more space, though they'd probably like some. When people have children, now they need space. If they have a lot of children, they really need a lot of space. When those children grow up and move away, they don't need as much space anymore.

Replacing single-family homes with apartments and condos helps people who 1. don't have children or 2. whose children have grown up and moved away because it will make apartments and condos cheaper. It hurts people with children, because they need lots of space, and removing single-family homes will send the price of the ones that remain to the moon. Why do you think so many people leave NYC when they have children? (Look at how much single-family homes cost in NYC).

You can say "well those people can lump it and go live in a condo." (It's always easier to demand someone else sacrifices, isn't it? Especially when you benefit from their sacrifices)

And I can say "well, no one has a divine decree to live anywhere, and if you don't like DC, you're welcome to move somewhere else."

There is a life cycle to housing - first it's new, then it's not so new, then it's old.

You're not talking about that, though. You're talking about people's housing needs and wants. And you're assuming that's everyone's housing needs and wants are the same as yours. But they're not.

Anonymous wrote:

There's a life cycle to housing.

People who are young and single don't need much space. When people get married, they don't need much more space, though they'd probably like some. When people have children, now they need space. If they have a lot of children, they really need a lot of space. When those children grow up and move away, they don't need as much space anymore.

Replacing single-family homes with apartments and condos helps people who 1. don't have children or 2. whose children have grown up and moved away because it will make apartments and condos cheaper. It hurts people with children, because they need lots of space, and removing single-family homes will send the price of the ones that remain to the moon. Why do you think so many people leave NYC when they have children? (Look at how much single-family homes cost in NYC).

You can say "well those people can lump it and go live in a condo." (It's always easier to demand someone else sacrifices, isn't it? Especially when you benefit from their sacrifices)

And I can say "well, no one has a divine decree to live anywhere, and if you don't like DC, you're welcome to move somewhere else."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help poor people. Or middle-income people. And it will actively hurt anyone with children. But it might help single white dudes who really want to live in neighborhoods they otherwise could not afford.

Please, let's think of the single white dudes, for once. They really, really want to live close to the bar.

That's silly, PP. When there are more housing units in areas where people want to live, then more people can live in those areas. Of course that will help middle-income people, people with children, and middle-income people with children. There's no divine decree that children must live in detached houses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help poor people. Or middle-income people. And it will actively hurt anyone with children. But it might help single white dudes who really want to live in neighborhoods they otherwise could not afford.

Please, let's think of the single white dudes, for once. They really, really want to live close to the bar.

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.

Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help poor people. Or middle-income people. And it will actively hurt anyone with children. But it might help single white dudes who really want to live in neighborhoods they otherwise could not afford.

Please, let's think of the single white dudes, for once. They really, really want to live close to the bar.

Anonymous wrote:Changing single-family-detached house zoning will not help people who were formerly homeless and earn too much for transitional housing.

It will help lots of other people, though.

So let's do change single-family-detached house zoning AND increase the supply of housing affordable for people who earn too much for transitional housing and need permanent housing.