Anonymous wrote:I would like to invest more in any of the upcoming wards in DC such as 7, or 8 but the property values are not coming up. Seems like stuck.

Get DC Govt to fund infrastructure improvements in 7 and 8. Get DC Govt to improve schools there, etc.

I would like to invest more in any of the upcoming wards in DC such as 7, or 8 but the property values are not coming up. Seems like stuck.

EOTR in ward 7 and 8 needs a lot of gentrification. The area is improving but need to do much better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?

"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.

But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.

"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.

That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.

Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.

Great! I think we still have plenty of room for even more new housing, and especially actually affordable housing, in Ward 3, where I also live.

Absolutely. Several of the Ward 3 ANCs are being asked to support DC’s purchase of the Wardman Marriott site for affordable housing. This could be a once in a generation game-changer.

Add that area to the growing list of places to avoid in the city.

The Smart Growth industry, which constantly pushes the theme that DC needs more affordable housing, does not support converting the Marriott site for affordable units. The site is a potential good mine for market rate development, which is the Smart Growth real goal. “Affordable housing” is simply the political pretext to obtain their goal.

I guess, though here's the chairman of Cleveland Park Smart Growth arguing that (a) yes, it's a good idea to explore turning the Marriott site into affordable housing but (b) even if that happens, it shouldn't mean that's the end of the push for more workforce or affordable housing in Ward 3: https://www.streetsensemedia.org/article/there-is-no-silver-bullet-for-affordable-housing-in-ward-3/#.YO9EYi1h2qk

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?

"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.

But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.

"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.

That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.

Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.

Great! I think we still have plenty of room for even more new housing, and especially actually affordable housing, in Ward 3, where I also live.

Absolutely. Several of the Ward 3 ANCs are being asked to support DC’s purchase of the Wardman Marriott site for affordable housing. This could be a once in a generation game-changer.

Add that area to the growing list of places to avoid in the city.

The Smart Growth industry, which constantly pushes the theme that DC needs more affordable housing, does not support converting the Marriott site for affordable units. The site is a potential good mine for market rate development, which is the Smart Growth real goal. “Affordable housing” is simply the political pretext to obtain their goal.

Have to love DCUM - when the subtext just literally becomes text.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all the GGW housing experts: Does this help make housing more affordable? Why doesn't anyone ever complain about short-term stay conversions hurting housing supply?

https://www.arlnow.com/2021/07/12/dittmar-looks-to-use-furnished-apartments-as-hotel-rooms/

Yeah, why didn’t GGW run a long story four years ago about how this sort of thing drives rents up and supporting a D.C. Council bill to address the problem? https://ggwash.org/view/62774/are-airbnbs-driving-up-your-rent

Great they wrote about it once and in theory. But when it comes to "NIMBYs" they're relentless and cover every supposed case of "NIMBYism" relentlessly. I'll start taking GGW seriously when they start calling out landlords that pull this kind of stuff or developers who shrink their projects because they're worried about absorption. If you can't fill your building -- especially an older one -- charge less. That's how filtering is supposed to work, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?

"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.

But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.

"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.

That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.

Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.

Great! I think we still have plenty of room for even more new housing, and especially actually affordable housing, in Ward 3, where I also live.

Absolutely. Several of the Ward 3 ANCs are being asked to support DC’s purchase of the Wardman Marriott site for affordable housing. This could be a once in a generation game-changer.

Add that area to the growing list of places to avoid in the city.

Anonymous wrote:For all the GGW housing experts: Does this help make housing more affordable? Why doesn't anyone ever complain about short-term stay conversions hurting housing supply?

https://www.arlnow.com/2021/07/12/dittmar-looks-to-use-furnished-apartments-as-hotel-rooms/

Yeah, why didn’t GGW run a long story four years ago about how this sort of thing drives rents up and supporting a D.C. Council bill to address the problem? https://ggwash.org/view/62774/are-airbnbs-driving-up-your-rent

Anonymous wrote:For all the GGW housing experts: Does this help make housing more affordable? Why doesn't anyone ever complain about short-term stay conversions hurting housing supply?

https://www.arlnow.com/2021/07/12/dittmar-looks-to-use-furnished-apartments-as-hotel-rooms/

Or about Wall Street money buying up supplies of condos and homes in order to enter the rental business at jacked up rates. Many of these same Wall zstrret investors may also be investors in so-called Smart Growth developments, so of course GGW won’t criticize them, either.

For all the GGW housing experts: Does this help make housing more affordable? Why doesn't anyone ever complain about short-term stay conversions hurting housing supply?

https://www.arlnow.com/2021/07/12/dittmar-looks-to-use-furnished-apartments-as-hotel-rooms/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?

"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.

But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.

"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.

That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.

Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.

No Ward 3 has not - not even close. The affordable units goal for Ward 3 is 1,990 - I doubt that many total units are under construction or approved. And the citywide goal is 36,000 new units so Ward 3's share would be what 4500 units? So sorry but no the two projects under construction in West Cleveland Park/South Tenleytown which I think total 1200 new units do not get the Ward even in the vicinity of meeting its goals.

How many affordable housing units will result from the mega-developments along Wisconsin Ave?

(Is “West Cleveland Park” a new term used by realtors? It’s unfamiliar.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the vast majority of the city, "increasingly density" is synonymous with gentrification. Are there people who dispute whether gentrification drives housing prices up?

"Increasing density" is just a rebranding of "gentrification." They also considered renaming it "Black homeowner removal project" but "increasing density" sounded less evil.

But in the neighborhoods where many DCUM readers and posters live, "increasing density" would just be increasing density. You can't gentrify an already rich area, and you can't remove black homeowners from neighborhoods that are already highly segregated and mostly white.

"Increasing density" happens everywhere in DC except Ward 3. It *only* happens in areas that are mostly black.

That's why I favor doing it in Ward 3.

Ward 3 has already exceeded the mayor’s 2025 net new housing goal 4 years early, when you look at units already under construction, ready to break ground and fully approved. This canard that Ward 3 has no density is a complete fabrication, tovarich.

No Ward 3 has not - not even close. The affordable units goal for Ward 3 is 1,990 - I doubt that many total units are under construction or approved. And the citywide goal is 36,000 new units so Ward 3's share would be what 4500 units? So sorry but no the two projects under construction in West Cleveland Park/South Tenleytown which I think total 1200 new units do not get the Ward even in the vicinity of meeting its goals.

It’s great to see leadership in this area. Rabbi Alexander is a very strong advocate for building affordable housing in Ward 3.

What’s going on with Adas Israel’s plan to build workforce/affordable housing on their large parking area? Talk about a game changer.