So as per OP's original post, and what we now know about the virus, and reports of Mendelson's comments, I would say that the reality is that if the Comprehensive Plan is off of the table for 2020, it will be off of the table for quite a while.

Some posts in this thread seem to imply that we will make it through 'short term' problem and cannot risk long term Comp Plan goals. What this COVID situation is showing us daily is that it is not a short term issue. It is going to be with us in one way or another for at least a couple of years.

We will get back to work and DC will see something of a return to life as we knew it, but there will be designed scars for quite a while and designed habit changes.

Comp Plan was really surviving on momentum and being pushed along by a Mayor who was not getting a lot of push back because there were not a lot of issues consuming the public attention. The same camps were entrenched in their lines as always (DCPS, homelessness, Crime, NIMBY) but the vast majority of the population was happy to simply 'get by' every day in the relatively good living we have in DC. Now that indifferent camp has been poked with a stick and is at least paying attention some new issues... like crowding. So things like 'let's change the height rules' go from potentially slipping under our non observant consciousness to our collectively asking 'whoa...why do we want high rises or even more people in supermarkets...'

It will take quite a bit of time before people are going to be racing to add more people to any equation in a deliberate or programmed manner. And even those new equations will see fundamental changes as people seek to distance rather than focus on densely packed common area or corridors. (Do you think that occupants of DC's new family shelters wish that they had the option of cooking in their apartments now rather than having to eat in common areas with warmed up delivered food?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve heard a phrase used: the “Clarendonization” of neighborhoods. People have a definite image of what that means.

They don't have to look like Clarendon any more than they have to look like Paris - which is actually far more dense than Clarendon. Or any more than any suburban single-house neighborhood has to look like any other suburban single-house neighborhood, which in this area they actually do.

I dont think any of us mind if they "look like" Paris.i am not sure how youd pull that off, but its a good look. However, the dense apattment housing in Paris is cramped + noisy to live in. .

Anonymous wrote:Density now is a non starter.

Does it make you feel better to tell yourself that?

Anonymous wrote:Density now is a non starter.

“Urbanists” need to find a new hobby now.

Like cleaning out mom’s basement while stuck in home quarantine.

Density now is a non starter.

Anonymous wrote:If you're unhappy with the density in DC, move. No one is stopping you. Move to NYC. Or Hong Kong. Or Manila. There are plenty of places in the world where you can live cheek-to-jowl with your neighbor. Some of us like DC because it's not like that. DC is a big city that's actually livable.

Terrific advice for the PP who keeps complaining.

If you're unhappy with the density in DC, move. No one is stopping you. Move to NYC. Or Hong Kong. Or Manila. There are plenty of places in the world where you can live cheek-to-jowl with your neighbor. Some of us like DC because it's not like that. DC is a big city that's actually livable.

Anonymous wrote:I’ve heard a phrase used: the “Clarendonization” of neighborhoods. People have a definite image of what that means.

They don't have to look like Clarendon any more than they have to look like Paris - which is actually far more dense than Clarendon. Or any more than any suburban single-house neighborhood has to look like any other suburban single-house neighborhood, which in this area they actually do.

I’ve heard a phrase used: the “Clarendonization” of neighborhoods. People have a definite image of what that means.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. Why must every area become generic copy of the other? We have very diverse options in DC: modern areas like the Waterfront and Ballpark district, many row house areas, dynamic late night areas like U Street, historic areas like Georgetown, suburban neighborhoods like Forest Hills and Crestwood, and neighborhoods with more of a village feel.

Can you please point me towards the parts of the Future Land Use Maps that require all areas to become the same?

Adding a lot of high-density units to a low-density neighborhood would make it become the "same" as a high density neighborhood. Surely this is obvi?

So all neighborhoods with single-family houses with yards are the same? The Palisades are the same as Dupont Park? Cleveland Park is the same as the Garden District in New Orleans, River Oaks in Houston, and Whitefish Bay in Milwaukee? I don't think so.

But saturate them all with “vibrant dense mixed-use urbanist development” and they surely will start to look much the same.

Yes, they'll all start to look exactly as much the same as the Palisades look to Dupont Park.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. Why must every area become generic copy of the other? We have very diverse options in DC: modern areas like the Waterfront and Ballpark district, many row house areas, dynamic late night areas like U Street, historic areas like Georgetown, suburban neighborhoods like Forest Hills and Crestwood, and neighborhoods with more of a village feel.

Can you please point me towards the parts of the Future Land Use Maps that require all areas to become the same?

Adding a lot of high-density units to a low-density neighborhood would make it become the "same" as a high density neighborhood. Surely this is obvi?

So all neighborhoods with single-family houses with yards are the same? The Palisades are the same as Dupont Park? Cleveland Park is the same as the Garden District in New Orleans, River Oaks in Houston, and Whitefish Bay in Milwaukee? I don't think so.

But saturate them all with “vibrant dense mixed-use urbanist development” and they surely will start to look much the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. Why must every area become generic copy of the other? We have very diverse options in DC: modern areas like the Waterfront and Ballpark district, many row house areas, dynamic late night areas like U Street, historic areas like Georgetown, suburban neighborhoods like Forest Hills and Crestwood, and neighborhoods with more of a village feel.

Can you please point me towards the parts of the Future Land Use Maps that require all areas to become the same?

Adding a lot of high-density units to a low-density neighborhood would make it become the "same" as a high density neighborhood. Surely this is obvi?

So all neighborhoods with single-family houses with yards are the same? The Palisades are the same as Dupont Park? Cleveland Park is the same as the Garden District in New Orleans, River Oaks in Houston, and Whitefish Bay in Milwaukee? I don't think so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. Why must every area become generic copy of the other? We have very diverse options in DC: modern areas like the Waterfront and Ballpark district, many row house areas, dynamic late night areas like U Street, historic areas like Georgetown, suburban neighborhoods like Forest Hills and Crestwood, and neighborhoods with more of a village feel.

Can you please point me towards the parts of the Future Land Use Maps that require all areas to become the same?

Adding a lot of high-density units to a low-density neighborhood would make it become the "same" as a high density neighborhood. Surely this is obvi?

Nice!

Anonymous wrote:Mendelson’s office is saying that the Office of Planning has to go back to the drawing board in light of post-COVID realty. And Council will not be taking up the Comp Plan amendments in 2029.

Go Mendo! I give him credit for trying to keep the mayor and the planning office more honest.