Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looking for help fighting a really, really egregious popback/popup etc. that's coming to our block. Looking for any advice, any names we should be contacting about how to fight this.

Here’s my advice: don’t fight. Pop ups are good for density and thus they’re good for cities.

I have nothing to do with developers. I just want lower housing prices, for the good of the city. So I want more units. Many more units.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

Anonymous wrote:

If you replace single-family homes with condos, people with children will leave. No one with kids wants to live in a condo. They'll move to the suburbs, which will add to the sprawl and make traffic worse. And then DC will become one of those near-child-free cities like San Francisco and NYC. This presumption that parents will be happy to move into a condo with their kids seems like a strange presumption that people without children always make.

Happening in MC all up the redline, from downtown Bethesda (at least on a metro stop), to North Bethesda (metro 2 miles away) to Pike and Rose and now Twin Brook. Tons of housing/infill, traffic awful (newsflash to all you Real Estate developers living in Chevy Chase, the FAMILIES buying your million dollar condos and townhomes DRIVE multiple cars and have kids they are sending to overcrowded Farmland, Tilden and WJ).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s what will cause the equity in your house to rise. Are you supposed to be the last gentrifier allowed in?

+1 to the second sentence. There’s something so disingenuous about well off (most likely) white people objecting to further development in their previously poor neighborhood.

Is this some kind of weird Orwellian joke? This stuff is *only* allowed to happen in black neighborhoods. If a developer went to DuPont Circle or Georgetown or Alexandria or Friendship Heights and proposed tearing down a single-family home and covering every square inch of the yard with condos, people would be in the streets with pitchforks. Of course, that never actually happens, because people in those neighborhoods have already engineered their zoning laws to ensure that developers can never do any such thing. So the developers come to poor black neighborhoods where zoning laws basically don't exist, and no one will complain.

Give me a break. Creating more multifamily housing is GOOD, not bad. It's extremely well established that restrictive zoning negatively impacts housing supply. Do you think it HELPS lower-income homeowners in these neighborhoods to have a historic designation slapped on that makes it harder to do repairs?

If you replace single-family homes with condos, people with children will leave. No one with kids wants to live in a condo. They'll move to the suburbs, which will add to the sprawl and make traffic worse. And then DC will become one of those near-child-free cities like San Francisco and NYC. This presumption that parents will be happy to move into a condo with their kids seems like a strange presumption that people without children always make.

Not everyone with kids wants a single family home. We live happily in a condo building with other families with children - three of the four condos have kids.

An exception to every rule. Let me guess: You're doing it because you want your kids to go to Murch/Deal/Wilson? I cannot imagine living with my children in a condo. They have such boundless energy they'd be bouncing off the walls. It would be like getting a border collie or some other high-energy dog and forcing it to live in a closet.

Anonymous wrote:Looking for help fighting a really, really egregious popback/popup etc. that's coming to our block. Looking for any advice, any names we should be contacting about how to fight this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

The home that was worth 3 million to one family is now worth 10 million to 10 families at a average of 1 mill each which just allowed a family to get into a neighborhood at roughly 65% of the cost of a single family home in said neighborhood.

This sounds like some magical math. I suspect the actual numbers will be more like:

1. Person selling the single-family home makes $500,000 minus whatever they initially paid & their property taxes
2. Developer makes $3 million replacing one home with six condos
3. People who bought the condos at $1 million each will not make a dime because, by the time they sell, interest rates will return to normal and the number of people who will (or can) pay $1 million for a condo in Petworth will crater. Remember: It's the Federal Reserve that's driving up prices and, one day, that will end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s what will cause the equity in your house to rise. Are you supposed to be the last gentrifier allowed in?

+1 to the second sentence. There’s something so disingenuous about well off (most likely) white people objecting to further development in their previously poor neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

The home that was worth 3 million to one family is now worth 10 million to 10 families at a average of 1 mill each which just allowed a family to get into a neighborhood at roughly 65% of the cost of a single family home in said neighborhood.

This sounds like some magical math. I suspect the actual numbers will be more like:

1. Person selling the single-family home makes $500,000 minus whatever they initially paid & their property taxes
2. Developer makes $3 million replacing one home with six condos
3. People who bought the condos at $1 million each will not make a dime because, by the time they sell, interest rates will return to normal and the number of people who will (or can) pay $1 million for a condo in Petworth will crater. Remember: It's the Federal Reserve that's driving up prices and, one day, that will end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s what will cause the equity in your house to rise. Are you supposed to be the last gentrifier allowed in?

+1 to the second sentence. There’s something so disingenuous about well off (most likely) white people objecting to further development in their previously poor neighborhood.

Is this some kind of weird Orwellian joke? This stuff is *only* allowed to happen in black neighborhoods. If a developer went to DuPont Circle or Georgetown or Alexandria or Friendship Heights and proposed tearing down a single-family home and covering every square inch of the yard with condos, people would be in the streets with pitchforks. Of course, that never actually happens, because people in those neighborhoods have already engineered their zoning laws to ensure that developers can never do any such thing. So the developers come to poor black neighborhoods where zoning laws basically don't exist, and no one will complain.

Give me a break. Creating more multifamily housing is GOOD, not bad. It's extremely well established that restrictive zoning negatively impacts housing supply. Do you think it HELPS lower-income homeowners in these neighborhoods to have a historic designation slapped on that makes it harder to do repairs?

If you replace single-family homes with condos, people with children will leave. No one with kids wants to live in a condo. They'll move to the suburbs, which will add to the sprawl and make traffic worse. And then DC will become one of those near-child-free cities like San Francisco and NYC. This presumption that parents will be happy to move into a condo with their kids seems like a strange presumption that people without children always make.

Not everyone with kids wants a single family home. We live happily in a condo building with other families with children - three of the four condos have kids.

An exception to every rule. Let me guess: You're doing it because you want your kids to go to Murch/Deal/Wilson? I cannot imagine living with my children in a condo. They have such boundless energy they'd be bouncing off the walls. It would be like getting a border collie or some other high-energy dog and forcing it to live in a closet.

Different people are different and different children are different. Not sure why that concept is hard to grasp.

This is why people leave NYC when they have children. Because the idea of raising children in condos sounds like a form of torture.

Again, not all people leave NYC when they have children. There are currently over 1.1 million children in the NYC Public schools, and of course there are many private schools there.

I note you say "sounds like" So you have not done it - ergo you do not know what its actually like.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

The home that was worth 3 million to one family is now worth 10 million to 10 families at a average of 1 mill each which just allowed a family to get into a neighborhood at roughly 65% of the cost of a single family home in said neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

The home that was worth 3 million to one family is now worth 10 million to 10 families at a average of 1 mill each which just allowed a family to get into a neighborhood at roughly 65% of the cost of a single family home in said neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s what will cause the equity in your house to rise. Are you supposed to be the last gentrifier allowed in?

+1 to the second sentence. There’s something so disingenuous about well off (most likely) white people objecting to further development in their previously poor neighborhood.

Is this some kind of weird Orwellian joke? This stuff is *only* allowed to happen in black neighborhoods. If a developer went to DuPont Circle or Georgetown or Alexandria or Friendship Heights and proposed tearing down a single-family home and covering every square inch of the yard with condos, people would be in the streets with pitchforks. Of course, that never actually happens, because people in those neighborhoods have already engineered their zoning laws to ensure that developers can never do any such thing. So the developers come to poor black neighborhoods where zoning laws basically don't exist, and no one will complain.

Give me a break. Creating more multifamily housing is GOOD, not bad. It's extremely well established that restrictive zoning negatively impacts housing supply. Do you think it HELPS lower-income homeowners in these neighborhoods to have a historic designation slapped on that makes it harder to do repairs?

If you replace single-family homes with condos, people with children will leave. No one with kids wants to live in a condo. They'll move to the suburbs, which will add to the sprawl and make traffic worse. And then DC will become one of those near-child-free cities like San Francisco and NYC. This presumption that parents will be happy to move into a condo with their kids seems like a strange presumption that people without children always make.

Not everyone with kids wants a single family home. We live happily in a condo building with other families with children - three of the four condos have kids.

An exception to every rule. Let me guess: You're doing it because you want your kids to go to Murch/Deal/Wilson? I cannot imagine living with my children in a condo. They have such boundless energy they'd be bouncing off the walls. It would be like getting a border collie or some other high-energy dog and forcing it to live in a closet.

Different people are different and different children are different. Not sure why that concept is hard to grasp.

This is why people leave NYC when they have children. Because the idea of raising children in condos sounds like a form of torture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MYOB. Other people deserve housing too. NIMBYs like you are why there is a housing shortage.

Thanks, real estate developer. Please tell us all about how replacing homes for families with luxury condos costing nearly $1 million a pop is going to fix everything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it’s what will cause the equity in your house to rise. Are you supposed to be the last gentrifier allowed in?

+1 to the second sentence. There’s something so disingenuous about well off (most likely) white people objecting to further development in their previously poor neighborhood.

Is this some kind of weird Orwellian joke? This stuff is *only* allowed to happen in black neighborhoods. If a developer went to DuPont Circle or Georgetown or Alexandria or Friendship Heights and proposed tearing down a single-family home and covering every square inch of the yard with condos, people would be in the streets with pitchforks. Of course, that never actually happens, because people in those neighborhoods have already engineered their zoning laws to ensure that developers can never do any such thing. So the developers come to poor black neighborhoods where zoning laws basically don't exist, and no one will complain.

Give me a break. Creating more multifamily housing is GOOD, not bad. It's extremely well established that restrictive zoning negatively impacts housing supply. Do you think it HELPS lower-income homeowners in these neighborhoods to have a historic designation slapped on that makes it harder to do repairs?

If you replace single-family homes with condos, people with children will leave. No one with kids wants to live in a condo. They'll move to the suburbs, which will add to the sprawl and make traffic worse. And then DC will become one of those near-child-free cities like San Francisco and NYC. This presumption that parents will be happy to move into a condo with their kids seems like a strange presumption that people without children always make.

Not everyone with kids wants a single family home. We live happily in a condo building with other families with children - three of the four condos have kids.

An exception to every rule. Let me guess: You're doing it because you want your kids to go to Murch/Deal/Wilson? I cannot imagine living with my children in a condo. They have such boundless energy they'd be bouncing off the walls. It would be like getting a border collie or some other high-energy dog and forcing it to live in a closet.

Different people are different and different children are different. Not sure why that concept is hard to grasp.