Metro Extensions (district, density, service)

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

MDAllStar obviously has no control over what developers decide to build around Metro stations in Rockville. I'm asking him whether or not it's a better idea to focus the growth in the core rather than the burbs from a long-term perspective.

I think growth has to be balanced. DC proper at 61 square miles can't absorb the 100,000+ people that come to the DC area every year. The growth has to be balanced, but the intensity is way higher in the city than the suburbs. The growth is noticeable in DC proper (cranes everywhere with more on the way) must more than the suburbs. You think of Gaitherburg and Montgomery County as the same thing when infact they are not. Montgomery County is the suburbs. Gaithersburg is a city. It is just like DC. Gaithersburg has it's own government and taxes and is separate from the county. The cities in the nation need to be developed with high intensity and the suburbs like Olney, Germantown, Wheaton (away from the Metro Station), Silver Sping (away from the Metro Station) should remain low density. Gaithersburg and Rockville on the other hand are densifying in their borbers and will become extremly urban much like DC in the future. Gaithersburg is the shining star though with unprecedented support for smart growth and density that isn't seen even in major cities DC included.

Gaithersburg actually welcome's these instead of fighting with NIMBY's like most places around the nation:


Kentlands Downtown



Downtown Gaithersburg


Downtown Crown

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

The little bit of development going on in all these suburbs is nothing compared to what is and will happen in DC proper. You are seeing a few thousand units go up around each metro stations around the region but that pales in comparsion to what is happening and will continue to happen in DC. Say each Metro station in Virginia and Maryland add a few thousand units by 2030. That still won't equal the 78,000 new units expected to be built in DC by 2030. You do the math on the amount of new highrises in DC it will take to build 78,000 new units. At 200 units per building just using a random number since some will have more and some will have less, DC could add around 390 new highrises over the next 20 years. Do you have any idea how much different DC will look in 2030? That is the short Manhattan I have been referring too.

As for Gaithersburg, it's smart growth 101. Growth is inevitable. You have two choices, grass field development or infill. The development happening in Gaithersburg is all infill. You are taking the growth that happens in every city in America, but building multi-family units for those families to live in within dense communities instead of mcmansion's out in subdivisions. What Gaithersburg is doing is what many cities around the country should do, but don't have the political background to do it. By the way, Gaithersburg is building this density without rapid transit. The only transit in Gaithersburg is bus and Gaithersburg has the most heavilly used bus lines of any city in Maryland outside Baltimore.

Ehh your favorite MD. But in reading there is one assumption that to me is still highly debatable. It assumes that DC will continue to grow at the current pace and maintain the demand of high priced properties. Remember that DC is the ONLY fast growing place in the last 10 years that is high priced. And there is one simple reason for this. That is govt subsidy of and an extremely fast growing govt complex (and no not all these jobs are govt emeployees but the VAST majority of DC growth is a direct effect of this) and it assumes that the govt can continue to subsidize this growth by off setting the cost through more and more high paying govt jobs. Maybe I am jaded but frankly i just dont see it. And to be honest as a taxpayer that pays significant taxes, I sure as hell hope that is not the case.

DC without subsidy is probably closer to a 3-4% per year grower, 30-40k a year and not 100K plus

Guess we will see as this is an election year. It seems commercial construction has slowed, and govt contracts also appear to be in a wait and see mode. I guess I am very much in a wait and see as to whether this momentum in residential is sustainable.

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

Ehh your favorite MD. But in reading there is one assumption that to me is still highly debatable. It assumes that DC will continue to grow at the current pace and maintain the demand of high priced properties. Remember that DC is the ONLY fast growing place in the last 10 years that is high priced. And there is one simple reason for this. That is govt subsidy of and an extremely fast growing govt complex (and no not all these jobs are govt emeployees but the VAST majority of DC growth is a direct effect of this) and it assumes that the govt can continue to subsidize this growth by off setting the cost through more and more high paying govt jobs. Maybe I am jaded but frankly i just dont see it. And to be honest as a taxpayer that pays significant taxes, I sure as hell hope that is not the case.

DC without subsidy is probably closer to a 3-4% per year grower, 30-40k a year and not 100K plus

Guess we will see as this is an election year. It seems commercial construction has slowed, and govt contracts also appear to be in a wait and see mode. I guess I am very much in a wait and see as to whether this momentum in residential is sustainable.

DC is actually way below normal building over the last 30 years currently in 2012. I think what people forget is high rise buildings are way more memorable, but don't encompass the same amount of growth you see in suburban housing construction which has ended in the dc metro core counties and suburban counties. Building is wayyyyy below what it was when single family housing construction was booming.

Also, DC proper will not skip a beat. The slow down will be in the suburbs and exurbs which is fine with me since they aren't urban to begin with. But as you already know with Center City redevelopment, high job creation is not needed to fuel downtown redevelopment which is what this is about. Young people are returning to the city and prefer to live in the city. Even if DC only gains 10,000 people a year region wide like Philly, much of that growth will be retained by DC proper instead of the Virginia and Maryland suburbs which is driven by government spending. Many people moving into DC don't even have to be from other regions. There is a return to the city happening with current DC region residents. The better DC becomes which is not going to stop, the more people will want to live in it. This is happening in every city across the nation.

For some reason, you have singled out DC as the only city nationwide that will have a halt to people returning to the city. How many people did the entire Philadelphia region gain last year in the census estimate? How many people did the city of Philadelphia gain? And most of that growth was in the center city area too. You are so unfair to DC it's sickening. You have a perfectly good example of urban growth versus suburban growth right in Philadelphia and yet you somehow think that will not happen in DC. Who is talking about suburban growth or region growth when people brag about growth? I know personally, I'm only talking about DC proper growth and the tiny bit of suburban metro TOD growth.

DC proper will continue to boom no matter what happens to the rest of the region in terms of residential construction just like every single city proper in the nation that are even seeing population declines while still having growth in the core like Baltimore etc. Give DC a break....geezzzz...

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

DC is actually way below normal building over the last 30 years currently in 2012. I think what people forget is high rise buildings are way more memorable, but don't encompass the same amount of growth you see in suburban housing construction which has ended in the dc metro core counties and suburban counties. Building is wayyyyy below what it was when single family housing construction was booming.

Also, DC proper will not skip a beat. The slow down will be in the suburbs and exurbs which is fine with me since they aren't urban to begin with. But as you already know with Center City redevelopment, high job creation is not needed to fuel downtown redevelopment which is what this is about. Young people are returning to the city and prefer to live in the city. Even if DC only gains 10,000 people a year region wide like Philly, much of that growth will be retained by DC proper instead of the Virginia and Maryland suburbs which is driven by government spending. Many people moving into DC don't even have to be from other regions. There is a return to the city happening with current DC region residents. The better DC becomes which is not going to stop, the more people will want to live in it. This is happening in every city across the nation.

For some reason, you have singled out DC as the only city nationwide that will have a halt to people returning to the city. How many people did the entire Philadelphia region gain last year in the census estimate? How many people did the city of Philadelphia gain? And most of that growth was in the center city area too. You are so unfair to DC it's sickening. You have a perfectly good example of urban growth versus suburban growth right in Philadelphia and yet you somehow think that will not happen in DC. Who is talking about suburban growth or region growth when people brag about growth? I know personally, I'm only talking about DC proper growth and the tiny bit of suburban metro TOD growth.

DC proper will continue to boom no matter what happens to the rest of the region in terms of residential construction just like every single city proper in the nation that are even seeing population declines while still having growth in the core like Baltimore etc. Give DC a break....geezzzz...

Where did I say halt, I just dont see the current being sustained long term. And how am I unfair? Seriously I am purely pointing out the obvious. I think you believe the socialist bubble in DC is because of DC and not fueled by Govt spend. I dont see the growth in spend to continue and thus see a slowing trend (meaning the current growth rates will not be market sustained long term)

BTW the burbs in Philly and DC both have grown more than the city.

DC will continue to grow it has so many great things to offer. I just dont see it maintaining the current rates and you somehow consider me to be a hater? As I have said many times DC is subsidized to grow at the price points. No other city grows at this rate and cost of real estate. It isnt because DC is somehow better it is because of all the high paying jobs generated from the expansion of govt. This really isnt rocket science MD. It is cyclical...

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

Where did I say halt, I just dont see the current being sustained long term. And how am I unfair? Seriously I am purely pointing out the obvious. I think you believe the socialist bubble in DC is because of DC and not fueled by Govt spend. I dont see the growth in spend to continue and thus see a slowing trend (meaning the current growth rates will not be market sustained long term)

I don't think the growth has much to do with any increase in government spending. There has always been a lot of money outside of the District. We're now starting to see a lot of that money finally appear in the District.

This is a decent snapshot of the population living in the posh areas of DC:

-Young couple. Both law firm associates. Making $215K each plus bonus. Own a condo in Logan Circle.

-3rd Year GW Student. Father owns a successful business in Houston. Pays his daughter's $1,500 share in a 2-BR apartment.

-Hill staffer. Makes $60K. Pays $1,300 for a basement apartment near U Street.

-Young couple in the foreign service returning to DC for training. Gets double per diem ($4,000). Rents a condo in Georgetown.

These are the types of people living in DC and they're not going anywhere. The likelihood of these jobs ever going away is about as strong as the likelihood of Congress cutting its pay.

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

I don't think the growth has much to do with any increase in government spending. There has always been a lot of money outside of the District. We're now starting to see a lot of that money finally appear in the District.

This is a decent snapshot of the population living in the posh areas of DC:

-Young couple. Both law firm associates. Making $215K each plus bonus. Own a condo in Logan Circle.

-3rd Year GW Student. Father owns a successful business in Houston. Pays his daughter's $1,500 share in a 2-BR apartment.

-Hill staffer. Makes $60K. Pays $1,300 for a basement apartment near U Street.

-Young couple in the foreign service returning to DC for training. Gets double per diem ($4,000). Rents a condo in Georgetown.

These are the types of people living in DC and they're not going anywhere. The likelihood of these jobs ever going away is about as strong as the likelihood of Congress cutting its pay.

This is my point exactly. The growth in the suburbs is what will be slowed. The growth in the city will continue. DC proper growth is being driven by it being a good place to live. That is a major difference from the past 50 years. Kidphilly seems to be confused thinking that the growth in the suburbs somehow will affect the city. Young people will always flock to DC proper even as families choose to move to low cost cities. There is a major shift in urban living in DC proper and the region wouldn't have to have one net person in growth next year and DC proper would still see a population increase from Maryland and Virginia. I think that is the biggest thing Kidphilly fails to see. People are moving into the city even from the suburbs and I beleive that will accelerate as the schools become good in the city which will happen as the demographics shift. Look at some of the elementary schools in Capitol Hill. That will become the norm over the next 20 years and not the exception.

The region grew a ton from 1990-2000. DC proper loss population! Sometimes, people let envy get in the way of reasonable thought.

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

Where did I say halt, I just dont see the current being sustained long term. And how am I unfair? Seriously I am purely pointing out the obvious. I think you believe the socialist bubble in DC is because of DC and not fueled by Govt spend. I dont see the growth in spend to continue and thus see a slowing trend (meaning the current growth rates will not be market sustained long term)

BTW the burbs in Philly and DC both have grown more than the city.

DC will continue to grow it has so many great things to offer. I just dont see it maintaining the current rates and you somehow consider me to be a hater? As I have said many times DC is subsidized to grow at the price points. No other city grows at this rate and cost of real estate. It isnt because DC is somehow better it is because of all the high paying jobs generated from the expansion of govt. This really isnt rocket science MD. It is cyclical...

2011 Census Population Estimates:

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 6,012,176 (+46,833) (Philadelphia Proper = 10,000 based on units available)
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 5,746,616 (+164,446) (DC Proper = 16,000 based on units available)

The Philadelphia metro area doesn't have construction in the suburbs like the intensity in center city. That explains the difference in population absorption. DC suburbs will slow down, but the city proper will continue will massive redevelopment and gentrification because urban investment is safe and has high demand. Even if the DC region has a 75% reduction in growth after government cuts, DC will still probably see around 10,000 people per year in growth as the suburbs slow down. That's pretty much what Philadelphia proper is seeing now with a 25% absorption of the region population. Unless, you think Center City Philadelphia has something DC doesn't.

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by MDAllstar

2011 Census Population Estimates:

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 6,012,176 (+46,833) (Philadelphia Proper = 10,000 based on units available)
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 5,746,616 (+164,446) (DC Proper = 16,000 based on units available)

The Philadelphia metro area doesn't have construction in the suburbs like the intensity in center city. That explains the difference in population absorption. DC suburbs will slow down, but the city proper will continue will massive redevelopment and gentrification because urban investment is safe and has high demand. Even if the DC region has a 75% reduction in growth after government cuts, DC will still probably see around 10,000 people per year in growth as the suburbs slow down. That's pretty much what Philadelphia proper is seeing now with a 25% absorption of the region population. Unless, you think Center City Philadelphia has something DC doesn't.

those numbers make sense to me, meaning the city at a run rate of 10K adds over the longer haul. Though remember the 25% is a recent phenomenon as the suburban reall estate market basically stopped at the end of the 2000s. If you look at the last ten years Philly as a percentage is probably less than 10%

[MDAllstar]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

those numbers make sense to me, meaning the city at a run rate of 10K adds over the longer haul. Though remember the 25% is a recent phenomenon as the suburban reall estate market basically stopped at the end of the 2000s. If you look at the last ten years Philly as a percentage is probably less than 10%

We are dealing with extremes anyway. DC is not going to see a 75% reduction in growth. Construction will also stop in the suburbs especially in Northern Vrginia as that area is more vulnerable to government cuts from defense than any other region. The construction in DC proper however will continue as redevelopment will continue to take hold in DC's blighted neighborhoods and suburban single family home construction grinds to a complete halt. Every single region around the nation that experiences low to no growth still is seeing construction in their downtown's and revitalization in their cores. It is happening everywhere and will continue to happen everywhere. DC is no different and developers have already said even as the suburban demand drops, the urban city proper demand will not skip a beat. This is coming from the developers mouths.

Keep in mind that the amount of construction going on in DC proper is nothing compared to construction going on in any given region so with a suburb slow down, the DC city proper construction is more than sustainable. Building a couple thousand housing units in the DC region mainly isolated to city proper is not that big a number. Anyway, I agree the suburbs will slow, I disagree the city will slow. I think there is more demand to live in DC proper than the city of Philadelphia also by the way. They can't build the units fast enough here. DC is a much more polished city and the allure you see with really polished high growth area's like Manhattan for instance is what will continue to fuel growth in DC proper. The suburbs will probably grind to a halt which will be great. Less sprawl!

[HurricaneDC]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

I don't think the growth has much to do with any increase in government spending. There has always been a lot of money outside of the District. We're now starting to see a lot of that money finally appear in the District.

This is a decent snapshot of the population living in the posh areas of DC:

-Young couple. Both law firm associates. Making $215K each plus bonus. Own a condo in Logan Circle.

-3rd Year GW Student. Father owns a successful business in Houston. Pays his daughter's $1,500 share in a 2-BR apartment.

-Hill staffer. Makes $60K. Pays $1,300 for a basement apartment near U Street.

-Young couple in the foreign service returning to DC for training. Gets double per diem ($4,000). Rents a condo in Georgetown.

These are the types of people living in DC and they're not going anywhere. The likelihood of these jobs ever going away is about as strong as the likelihood of Congress cutting its pay.

This is why I'm considering a move to the sticks if I don't move out West. I don't wanna live in a basement and I'm never gonna be a lawyer or cardiac surgeon (which you have to be if you wanna own a nice house with land in this region), and while my dad is well-off he certainly wouldn't keep paying my rent once I graduate college.