DC's Record Population Growth 2010-2011 (Washington: crime, transportation, suburbs)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is very little vacant land for high density development in the white side of DC, the NW side of town. Where there is lots of available land for high density development- to make the City grow significantly- is in Southeast DC. Do you want to move to Southeast DC?
You always try to pull this out to generic numbers and I've never argued that a majority of middle class people are moving away from auto dependence. A certain and powerful segment of the population has reversed long-standing trends.
I think you might read what you wish in my posts because you've accused me of all I've listed, meaning you take a subtle point and force me to one extreme or the other. If you'd look for the nuance of perspective you'd understand my positions better. Not a big deal, I just grow tired of correcting your misstatements.
I don't see how my addressing subtle points forces you to take extreme positions. You do that all of your own.
Looking at the areas that are showing the greatest population growth over the past year - DC, Texas and Florida - hardly suggests that there's been a major "cultural shift" favoring urban areas or that the biggest lesson to be drawn is that poverty has increased in the suburbs. It suggests that people move to places where they perceive there to be greater economic opportunities. Many of the newcomers to DC are 20-somethings with a ton of student debt who couldn't find jobs in other places. If conditions improve, some will relocate to other cities, and many others will move with their lives by marrying, having children and moving to the suburbs.
There is very little vacant land for high density development in the white side of DC, the NW side of town. Where there is lots of available land for high density development- to make the City grow significantly- is in Southeast DC. Do you want to move to Southeast DC?
It is not just about the obvious "vacant" land. It is also about underdeveloped land which is seemingly under-the-radar to the casual observer at first glance. I've spent a lot of my personal time going over the numbers, and I like what the future can hold for DC.
There are over 70,000 residential units, either under construction, or in the near, medium, or long term planning stages. Thousands of those units will be located in NW DC.
Even upon build-out of the 70,000 residential units (enough for 140,000 more residents), there will still be tons of vacant or under-utilized land in DC that will be available for development/redevelopment. And the 70,000 number includes mainly major development projects and not the hundreds/thousands of large single historic row houses that are in the process of being subdivided into 6 units a pop (redevelopment of existing housing stock into higher density development on the micro scale).
Even in some of the city's most desirable neighborhoods, there still exists the capacity for significant development. Southeast DC already has some great neighborhoods, including Capitol Hill and Hillcrest.
Capitol Riverfront, an up-and-coming neighborhood in Southeast DC, is projected to host over 9,000 residential units upon full build-out. Things there are getting off to a great start with new buildings nearing full occupancy (yes, with high-income earners).
So, the answer to your question is...... yes. Don't paint Southeast DC with a broad stroke.
I don't see how my addressing subtle points forces you to take extreme positions. You do that all of your own.
Looking at the areas that are showing the greatest population growth over the past year - DC, Texas and Florida - hardly suggests that there's been a major "cultural shift" favoring urban areas or that the biggest lesson to be drawn is that poverty has increased in the suburbs. It suggests that people move to places where they perceive there to be greater economic opportunities. Many of the newcomers to DC are 20-somethings with a ton of student debt who couldn't find jobs in other places. If conditions improve, some will relocate to other cities, and many others will move with their lives by marrying, having children and moving to the suburbs.
There you go again accusing me of something I never said. I listed a number of charges you've made against me. If you can prove I've taken those positions (w/o taking some statement out of context) then we can move beyond my sense that you simply dont see the world beyond black and white.
If you think the pioneers or abandonment of cities for suburbia or the revitalization of cities is just some emotionless, completely rational economic decision without any desire for a lifestyle, I have some ocean-front property in Iowa.
JEB vs. BLUEFLY. Joel Kotkin vs. Richard Florida. I think I know where each person stands with regards to urban vs. suburban and coastal cities vs. flyover country.
Do a Google search on "Kotkin vs. Florida" and you will read some interesting debates about economic development, lifestyles and transportation planning.
I don't see how my addressing subtle points forces you to take extreme positions. You do that all of your own.
Looking at the areas that are showing the greatest population growth over the past year - DC, Texas and Florida - hardly suggests that there's been a major "cultural shift" favoring urban areas or that the biggest lesson to be drawn is that poverty has increased in the suburbs. It suggests that people move to places where they perceive there to be greater economic opportunities. Many of the newcomers to DC are 20-somethings with a ton of student debt who couldn't find jobs in other places. If conditions improve, some will relocate to other cities, and many others will move with their lives by marrying, having children and moving to the suburbs.
I tend to think of the metro vs metro decision and the urban vs low density decisions as mostly orthogonal. I mean I know they are not entirely, because some metros have no good urbanist options, and some folks move to particular metros for the urbanist options. Still, I would think that moving to Florida, and conflating moving to a SFH in Orlando with say moving to South Beach, seems like it misses the point of the discussion on urbanism. Similarly in Texas there are a few hot spots of urbanist development.
JEB vs. BLUEFLY. Joel Kotkin vs. Richard Florida. I think I know where each person stands with regards to urban vs. suburban and coastal cities vs. flyover country.
Do a Google search on "Kotkin vs. Florida" and you will read some interesting debates about economic development, lifestyles and transportation planning.
Not sure that one would appreciate being compared to Richard Florida, whose work is often challenged by other academics, including those who care deeply about cities and urban planning, as boosterism that is based on the misinterpretation of data. A recent blog post by a University of Pennsylvania professor to that effect:
I would imagine that Kotkin would agree with Rybcynski here and see some parallels when it comes to some of the discussions of the DC metropolitan area that take place on C-D.
JEB vs. BLUEFLY. Joel Kotkin vs. Richard Florida. I think I know where each person stands with regards to urban vs. suburban and coastal cities vs. flyover country.
Do a Google search on "Kotkin vs. Florida" and you will read some interesting debates about economic development, lifestyles and transportation planning.
No, this isn't that ideological. Florida has the general idea but, as Jeb mentioned, lets his boosterism get in his way. Kotkin is the same way with his agenda.
My only issue is not being misinterpreted or having broad, inaccurate ideas I never said (like the ones listed above) attributed to me. Metro areas are dynamic places moving in multiple directions simultaneously. It's important to understand the nuance of cultural shifts (be they a surge of exurban development that accelerates existing development patterns in that direction or a surge in TOD that reverses decades of inner city population decline, often both happening at the same time).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.