THE ANATOMY OF AN ILLUSION

IN TIMES OF IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE, ILLUSIONS GROW LIKE KUDZU. BUT WHY DO THEY CONTINUE TO SURVIVE WHEN THE ECONOMY IS SHRINKING – AS IT MUST – AND AMONG CITIZENS SHOULD KNOW BETTER?

SuperMassDenial cannot be the whole answer.

One of the most frustrating aspects of working to create an understanding of functional and dysfunctional human settlement patterns is dealing with those who blithely claim that “the facts” support their position when they must know at some level that they are absolutely wrong.

It is one thing when the advocate of an Illusion if someone is heavily invested in an unfortunate decision. It is another for a person who claims to be young enough to know better continues to chan the mantra of dysfunction.

Case in point: The comment of NovaMiddleMan (NMM) that “the vast majority” support scattered Urban dwellings stated a comment on the DISAPPOINTMENT CUBED post of 18 February. Here is part of that post (in italics) with comments.

At 6:23 PM NMM said”

I agree the blog format is not the best way to communicate.”

Great! An area of agreement to build on! In fact blogging may be the WORST way to communicate because it allows rabid defense of ridiculous positions.

I can sense your frustration about the lack of a common nomenclature.”

But then why do you continue to use Core Confusing Words? Do you understand that continuing to use Core Confusing Words like “suburban” makes no sense, literally?

…………

The bottom line however is that the data suggests a vast majority reject your viewpoint…”

Since EMR’s position is the market favors more Balanced settlement patterns, this must mean that “the vast majority” support unBalanced settlement patterns.

NMM must know there is no data to support his statement. Why does he make this statement?

The numbers are clear 87.5 percent (1980 to 1990 data upon which the 87.5 Percent Rule is based) did NOT choose scatteration at the Dooryard and Cluster scale, even when the choices were limited. There has never been less than 80 percent of the market who favor Balanced over scatteration IF GIVEN A CHOICE regardless of income. Twenty percent is not “a vast majority” it is an uninformed minority.

NMM has not shown one case where the same unit by the same builder sells for LESS in a more Balanced component of human settlement than it sells for a less Balanced or unBalanced, monoculture component.

The reason he has not cited the data is that it does not exist. From the 70s to the 90s there was a $100,000 difference between more Balanced vs less Balanced / unBalanced contexts.

NB: IF the TOTAL cost of location variable costs were assessed, the scattered site (unBalanced) dwelling would cost far more but that is not the case under current conditions.

The bottom line is that the market pays a premium for a more Balanced locations, period.

The market proves that NMM’s view “The American Dream” is sales hype when citizens ARE GIVEN A CHOICE.

[NB: in a later comment in this string, NMM admitted he was basing his comment on the PEW survey noted in the DISAPPOINTMENT CUBED post. This survey was profiled because of the gross Vocabulary confusion and is not a basis for identifying informed opinions. Using this survey to establish preference has all the validity of going to a used car lot and asking the first 100 tire kickers: “If price and maintenance was not an issue would you rather have a Hyundai or a Mercedes?”]

To further examine the blanket statement: “a vast majority reject your viewpoint” vis a vis residential settlement patterns – that is that the vast majority prefer scattered, unBalanced settlement patterns as opposed to more Balanced settlement patterns. Here is a two step exercise for those who want to understand the basics:

It is economically impossible for ‘a vast majority’ to own a Single Household Detached Dwelling. That is because given a normal distribution of disposable income in any First World nation-state from 60 to 95 percent of the population (depending on the state of the economy and the allocation of true costs) COULD NOT AFFORD a Single Household Detached Dwelling.

Let us assume that, fearing an uprising from ‘a vast majority’ who favor scatteration, it was decided to pay a housing stipend to every Household so ‘the vast majority’ could afford to pay for ‘what they wanted’ and they did in fact buy The American Dream per NMM.

Under those conditions it would be physically (to say nothing of economically) impossible to provide services, especially – but not limited to – Mobility and Access.

The following phrase was separated out from the rest of NMM’s assertion because these last four words make the statement into a pure red herring.

“… of urban dense living …”

EMR does not advocate “dense” Urban living. EMR does not advocate density for density’s sake. EMR advocates exactly what the market finds most attractive – Balance, especially at the Alpha Village- and Alpha Community scale.

and prefer a ‘sub’urban lifestyle …”

Intentional use of a Core Confusing Word such as ‘suburban’ is always a red herring. The user must define what they mean by “suburban” using lot size, dwelling size, persons per acre density and other metrics for each component scale of settlement pattern from the Unit to at least the Alpha Community (aka, lowest six components in the New Urban Region Conceptual Framework.)

close to a major metropolitan area.”

If “the vast majority” lived some where else, there would be no “metropolitan” area only scattered “sub”Urban land uses.

Even more important “close to” indicates this “vast majority” lives OUTSIDE major metropolitan areas. Since the majority of all residents live INSIDE major metropolitan areas this must be “the vast majority” of the minority?

Those are the facts and that is what the market has demanded for years …”

As noted above, that is not so. The MARKET provides a premium for well located units in more Balanced components.

“… and still continues to demand.”

Even the marginal “demand” has slipped as the cost of dysfunction has become more painful.

I would also add again a majority also prefer …”

“Prefer” if they believe they are among the few who can afford the total price. The larger the Region, the higher the price.

“… and demand access to automobiles and driving.”

There was never a time when driving would provide mobility for more than 50 percent of the population and that number is shrinking as the population ages and the cost rises and / or the ability to pay shrinks.

That is not an ideological hobby horse those are the facts on the ground.”

Sorry, it is an Illusion AND a ideological hobby horse..

I guess in all seriousness I question what you hope to achieve through this medium.”

Learn if there is a way to cure Illusions and to understand the perspective of those gripped by Myth.

I think after several months or years most of us understand what you are trying to do.”

Apparently not since NMM has not yet gotten a handle on EMR’s perspective.

However you seem to fail to understand the reality of the situation.”

See above.

The world is not a sandbox you can control at will.”

Another red herring. NMM will not find a bigger advocate of the market, so long as it is a well informed market, that is citizens ca
n make decisions that are in fact in their individual and collective best interest. What is it that the vast majority would choose, if they had a choice and understood the consequences of their actions.

Like it or not the population has rejected and continues to reject your vision for the future.

See above.

Without a Fundamental Transformation of the governance structure (and the economic structure) there will be no Fundamental Transformation of the human settlement pattern and thus no potential for a sustainable trajectory of civilization.

The democracies with market economies are an impossibility without all three Fundamental Transformations.

As luck would have it more and more are discovering this reality. See Lifestyle preferences are shifting by Bill Cunniff in the 27 Feb Sun-Times. For a summary of the marketing success of those who claim to sell dwellings in more Balanced environments subscribe to New Urban News.

EMR


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

21 responses to “THE ANATOMY OF AN ILLUSION”

  1. Groveton Avatar

    EMR:

    Frankly, I can see NMM’s point. However, I think it’s easier to understand through example than in abstract.

    Here are a few examples that I think illustrate NMM’s point:

    1. Preety much anybody who owns a house in Great Falls could sell their house and use the money to buy a condo or smaller house in Reston. They would be moving about 7 miles so it’s hard to imagine that employment location would play a big role in the decision. Reston is clearly closer to being a balanced community than Great Falls. So, why do people keep living in Great Falls? Why doesn’t the consumer preference for more balanced communities result in a mas migration from Great Falls to Reston? Why would anybody live in Great Falls when there is a much more balanced community right around the corner?

    The fact is that there are many people who prefer to live in low density places vs. high density places. I am one of them. I have a lot of kids but many of my neighboors don’t. But they like the relative quiet and privacy of Great Falls. In fact, they pay a lot more to live in a “scatterized community” rather than a more balanced community.

    2. Why does anybody live in Belle Haven when they could live in Old Town, Alexandria?

    3. Why does any non-farmer live in Upperville when they could live in “downtown” Leesburg?

    4. Why does anybody live in Henrico County rather than the Fan?

    5. Why does anybody live in Crozet instead of the City of Charlottesville?

    EMR – I think you are a bit mistaken here. If people really were demanding to live in balanced communities they would move from “scatterization” to balanced communities. Instead, I think people say they would like to live in “more balanced communities”. For me, that would mean putting sidewalks in Great Falls as a start. So, if you asked me if I wanted to live in a more balanced community I’d say “yes”, if you asked me whether I wanted to move to a more balanced community I’d say “no”. Actually, I’d say, “I would have moved to Reston years ago if I wanted to live there”.

    At the risk of having Jim Bacon and LarryG spin arond like the Tazmanian Devil Monster from the old Bugs Bunny cartoons – let me paraphrase what I think they’d say. I think they would say that more people would want to live in balanced communities if the people living in scatterized communities had to pay the full location variable costs of their lifestyles. I personally think that argument is more based on an artful definition of location variable costs than reality but I think that’s their argument. Obviously, either or both will vehemently disagree if I have misrepresented their opinion.

  2. Larry G Avatar

    I’m going to keep asking how EMR feels about UDAs – recently enacted by Virginia to encourage …actually require density…..

    is this Law a step in the right direction or is it a gift to developers?

    oh by the way – I did a GOOGLE Search for “Core Confusing Words” and you know what?

    other than BR “hits”, it’s a pretty slim result..

    so.. much of the world is pretty much clueless about that phase..

    looks like a steep uphill to me.

  3. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Groveton:

    Two quick points:

    Show us the same house / same builder that demonstrates your position.

    (NB: A Ryland Hamilton model that a Ryland Exec built on 50 acres outside Waterford is NOT “same house / same builder.”)

    If you had to pay a fair allocation of all location varible costs — most of which you now pay a flat fee or no charge (e.g. ground water impact) you would never have bought your house in the first place. Recall the real numbers are $6,700 for a four bedroom in a Alpha Neighborhood vs $67,000 for same house on 10 acres. Those were real costs in early 90s when the data for the 10X Rule was calculated.

    Larry:

    “… going to keep asking how EMR feels about UDAs – recently enacted by Virginia to encourage …actually require density…”

    EMR is already working on a note that addresses this question. Just too much to do…

    “oh by the way – I did a GOOGLE Search for “Core Confusing Words” and you know what?

    “other than BR “hits”, it’s a pretty slim result..”

    You would have found the same result if you Googled

    “the invisible hand” in 1776 or

    “natural selection” in 1859

    The question is will there be enough resouces to do something about Fundamental Transformation by the time you get 3 million hits?

    “looks like a steep uphill to me.”

    Right you are.

    EMR

  4. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Groveton:

    One other point:

    You are mixing apples and lemons or rather confusing the organic components of human settlement. Here are some notes on your examples:

    2. Why does anybody live in Belle Haven when they could live in Old Town, Alexandria?

    Belle Haven and Old Town are a Beta Neighborhood and a Beta Village in the same Beta Community.

    There are lots of reasons to choose one or the other but Units like the ones that exist in both places would fit well in a Balanced (Alpha) Community.

    Just for kicks, how much would have to you pay for a Belle Haven house on the same size lot next to Sen. Mark Warners house in Old Town? Even that is not same house same builder.

    3. Why does any non-farmer live in Upperville when they could live in “downtown” Leesburg?

    Lots of reasons and there is no reason they should not, IF THE PAID THE LOCATION VARIABLE COSTS.

    4. Why does anybody live in Henrico County rather than the Fan?

    Again different scales. Where in Henrico? There are what, four or five Beta Communites in Henrico? Only one Fan.

    There is no basis for comparison given the geographies you cited but if ALL THE LOCATION VARIABLE COSTS WERE FAIRLY ALLOCATED…

    5. Why does anybody live in Crozet instead of the City of Charlottesville?

    See Upperville answer above.

    Sorry, Groveton.

    Apples and Apples, same builder, same house, same scale component, fair allocation of costs.

    Without those you are just prolonging the time before citizens can start evolving functional human settlemnt patterns.

    You and everyone else can live just where they want — so long as you pay the fair cost. More on that later in MORE ON TREATING SEWERAGE RIGHT.

    EMR

  5. Not Ed Risse Avatar
    Not Ed Risse

    Groveton,

    I think I can help you out here.

    The homeowners in Great Falls received a massive subsidy from prior landowners who were forced by restrictive zoning rules to develop in a less valuable low-density dysfunctional pattern.

    These same zoning rules today keep the land under your house artificially undervalued and therefore keep your taxes artificially low.

    All the development in Loudoun County along Route 7 from the Fairfax County line to Leesburg could have and would have been built along Route 7 in Fairfax County between Tysons Corner and the Loudoun County line.

    Fairfax County stole all that locational property value through mandatory low-density zoning.

    We would have a dozen Lowe’s Island developments between Route 7 and the Potomac River in Fairfax County if the free market had been allowed to work.

    We would have better roads that would have been built by the developers, and a hundred thousand people would have an easier closer shorter drive to their job in Tysons Corner.

    Zoning artificially depresses land prices for homeowners on large lots. This keeps their taxes down and subsidizes their lifestyle.

    Without the restrictive zoning rules, huge sections of Fairfax County would be redeveloped at a substantial profit and benefit to both the existing homeowners and the future more numerous more urban dwellers.

    Even if you take the past theft of property rights, and the tax subsidy issue out of the equation, there is still a massive economic opportunity cost to living on a large lot in Fairfax County. Very few large lot homeowners would be able to resist the substantially higher value they would be offered for redevelopment.

    To make a peaceful orderly transition to such a freedom oriented world, I would propose that each neighborhood could decide with a 90% (could be lower) majority vote to abolish its zoning.

    That would be more local government than what you have now, although true “local” government is letting each landowner decide for themselves how to develop their property (while of course not emitting toxins onto neighboring properties, etc.).

    So Groveton, Great Falls residents are not paying their true location variable costs!

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Not EMR – I think you are both smoking and inhaling. Why would Fairfax County residents want a sizable portion of Loudoun County’s population to be living in Fairfax County?

    We wouldn’t. We need to build the schools that Loudoun County taxpayers are funding. We would need more parks and recreational facilitities. We would need more police and fire stations, as well as libraries. We would need to rebuild our sanitary sewer and water treatment plants. Our already over-crowded roads would be even more crowded.

    “We would have better roads that would have been built by the developers.” That statement is plain laughable. Developers don’t pay squat in Fairfax County. Fairfax County is proposing to raise land development fees to 90% of the unloaded costs, and the developers are screaming bloody murder. A supervisor told me that if cost-based profferswere levied, the developers would make a major effort to have the General Assembly take away Fairfax County’s power to obtain proffers at all. We’d see $10 impact fees.

    “Without the restrictive zoning rules, huge sections of Fairfax County would be redeveloped at a substantial profit and benefit to both the existing homeowners. …” I’m virtually speechless on this one. Development in Fairfax County drives down the quality of life and pushes up real estate taxes.

    A semi-rural Great Falls is the best friend of county residents.

    Let’s hear it for Groveton and his neighbors.

    TMT

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    it allows rabid defense of ridiculous positions.

    Like EMRs.

    ——————————

    Price cuts both ways. It shows what the people who pay the prices want and it ALSO shows what those who don’t pay the prices don’t want.

    Price is objective but value is subjective and so different people have different utility functions for what EMR considers to be dysfunctional.

    ——————————

    Since EMR’s position is the market favors more Balanced settlement patterns, this must mean that “the vast majority” support unBalanced settlement patterns.

    Huh? Total non sequitur, I believe. One clause does not follow from the other. My father would ridicule you into the middle of next week for such faulty thinking.

    ————————

    “The numbers are clear 87.5 percent (1980 to 1990 data upon which the 87.5 Percent Rule is based) did NOT choose scatteration at the Dooryard and Cluster scale,”

    EMR must know there is no data to support his statement. Why does he make this statement?

    —————————-

    “The reason he has not cited the data is that it does not exist. From the 70s to the 90s there was a $100,000 difference between more Balanced vs less Balanced / unBalanced contexts.”

    So the people that lived in unbalanced contexts were unwilling to pay $100,000 for it. Your point must be that the market works.

    “The bottom line is that the market pays a premium for a more Balanced locations, period.”

    Wrong. Some of the market does, and some doesn’t. There are vast slums close to many places you would call more balanced. And there are othe people who prefer not to pay the price.

    —————————–

    “That is because given a normal distribution of disposable income in any First World nation-state from 60 to 95 percent of the population (depending on the state of the economy and the allocation of true costs) COULD NOT AFFORD a Single Household Detached Dwelling.”

    Complete and utter nonsense. We coud stamp pout perfectly adequate dwellings for a price anyone can afford, if we decide to do so. The reason we don’t do it is that we prefer not to live next to such people.

    That may well be the whole reason PEC exists. At least some people think that is the case.

    —————————–

    “NMM will not find a bigger advocate of the market, so long as it is a well informed market, that is citizens can make decisions that are in fact in their individual and collective best interest. “

    NMM will never find a bigger producer of profound sounding proclamations qualified into insignificance either.

    EMR would strongly support any market kowtows to him and his thinking.

    RH

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Development in Fairfax County drives down the quality of life and pushes up real estate taxes. “

    This is a bogus argument. Compare Fauquier and Loudoun only a few years ago. Then they were very similar. Today Loudoun residents, per each, earn more and own more – and yes they pay more taxes.

    There are also more of them. Drive down the quality of life and raise taxes is simplistic, misleading, and probably wrong.

    Equal opportunity nitpicker, RH

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    AUA’s will be a gift to developers and a subsidy from those outside the UDA.

    RH

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If NOT Ed Risse is right, then people desiring large lots would have to go farther to find them. maybe to Delaplane.

    Artificially large lot sizes do represent a subsidy to current owners, who tend to be on the wealthy side. Especially compared to the previous owners.

    UDA’s will result in artificially amll lot sizes with the reverse effects fro those NER describes.

    RH

  11. Groveton Avatar

    OK –

    It’s tax time in the Old Dominion. I pay about $225,000 in state and local taxes. Not federal and I’m not even counting sales taxes, etc. Just plain old income and real estate taxes. I live on a 7 acre lot. I drive about 10,000 miles per year – total (commute and errands). My street is owned by me and the neighbors. We pay to pave it, plow it, repair it, etc. I have my own septic system and well water. I have five sons – one is in college (out of state), three go to private schools and one is in the Fairfax County system.

    Now … just one more time … please explain how I am not covering my full costs.

    This is BS. The facts don’t support the conjecture. You want to know who isn’t covering his fill costs? How about EMR or LarryG? You have my numbers. What are yours?

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Wow. Sounds like you need a new tax accountant. Still, I’ll bet you have more left after taxes than I do. ;-).

    I pay something around one tenth of that and I doubt my income is one tenth of yours.

    For value received, it sounds like you are taking a bath. At least I get “services” from two counties.

    RH

  13. Groveton Avatar

    I have a lot of revenue streams that are paying out – even in this economy. In fact, because of this economy. But these are financial investments in India, Los Angeles, etc. They consume no costs in Virginia. But I live here so I pay and pay and pay. I have plenty left after taxes. 30 years of structured, disciplined investing has its benefits. Any other graduate fo Groveton High School could have done what I did. But they didn’t. But one more time … to all the faux socialists out there … how am I failing to carry my weight?

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “30 years of structured, disciplined investing has its benefits.”

    I need to get you to talk to my wife.

    RH

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If EMR would tone it down about 30%, back up the remaining ideas with some verifiable facts, and drop the driveling ideology, he might have a message tht would sell to a few people.

    RH

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Any other graduate fo Groveton High School could have done what I did. But they didn’t.”

    It’s astonishing to me that the average 30 year old has a net worth of around $7000.

    And that was BEFORE.

    RH

  17. Groveton Avatar

    LOL

    My wife is good on the structured investment side. But she is even better on the structured spending side. The latest? It’s time to buy a house on the CHesapeake Bay “because they are now so cheap”. I’ve looked at perhaps 50 houses. Ain’t nothing cheap about any of them! But, I plan on throwing one cardboard box a day into the bay while chanting “LarryG is the antiChrist”. That might help me feel better about this latest monetary inferno.

    LarryG – just kidding. We all know who the real antiChrist is.

  18. Groveton Avatar

    Not Ed Risse:

    Fascinating comments. Ridiculous but fascinating. It's hard to know where to start when someone like you starts freelancing with macro-economic theory but I'll try to debug your thinking.

    "The homeowners in Great Falls received a massive subsidy from prior landowners who were forced by restrictive zoning rules to develop in a less valuable low-density dysfunctional pattern.".

    Do you have a current mailing address for the Potowmack Indians? I'd like to send them a thank you note. Here's a bit of history about Great Falls – http://www.livingingreatfalls.com/index.php?pageId=31336&action=view_hoa&itemId=1848. As you'll read the "prior landowners" moved in about 9,000 years ago. But, maybe you don't count the Native Americans in the Alice in Wonderland world where your arguments live. Is Lord Fairfax the aggrieved party? Hard to shed too many tears for Ole Faxy – what with the king of England just giving a huge chunk of land. Oh OK – George Washington did lust after one of the Farifax wives before he married Martha. Maybe they do deserve some sympathy. Speaking of George Washington – he surveyed parts of Great Falls and built a canal here – is he the prior landowner who handed out the subsidies? Maybe Light Horse Harry Lee is who you want me to feel sorry for. After all:

    "On Dec. 16, 1790, the town of Matildaville, in Great Falls Park, was chartered. The town was named for the wife of 'Light-Horse' Harry Lee, who invested in its future. It was laid out on 40 acres of land, in half-acre lots. Matildaville was a support facility for the Potowmack Canal, composed of the Potomac River from Cumberland, Md., to Alexandria, with five skirting canals, one of them in Great Falls Park .".

    Half acre lots?!? Does the real Ed Risse know about this dysfunction?

    Anyway – enough history. Maybe you can just post a comment telling me who I ripped off so I can apologize. The guy who sold me the land where I built my house told me that he was thrilled at how much money I was paying for part of his acreage. Funny thing – I got the distinct impression that he thought he was ripping me off.

    But there is good news for you. The scam's not over yet. There are tons of listings for land in Zip Code 22066. Look here:

    http://www.weichert.com/search/realestate/SearchResults.aspx?zip=22066&ptypeid=30

    You can rip off the stupid property owner on Blackberry Ln for a scant $6.2M! Time to get in on this rip-off NER before all the rippin' off is over. This rip off is 9,000 years old – it has to end sometime, right? Rip that "prior property owner" off by stealing that lot for $6M.

    "These same zoning rules today keep the land under your house artificially undervalued and therefore keep your taxes artificially low.".

    Yeah, the houses here are really cheap. Like White Castle burgers – buy 'em by the dozen. Let's go back to Weichert.Com to look at these public housing wannabes:

    http://www.weichert.com/search/realestate/SearchResults.aspx?zip=22066

    $9.5M, $8.9M – yeah, these guys are robbing Fairfax County blind with the minimal taxes incurred on those homes. But … wait a minute … isn't 22066 the zip code with the most expensive real estate in Fairfax County. So – how are these houses artifically undervalued? Shouldn't 22066 have the cheapest houses in the county with this brilliant con game we're running. I know, I know – there I go again clouding the issue with facts.

    "All the development in Loudoun County along Route 7 from the Fairfax County line to Leesburg could have and would have been built along Route 7 in Fairfax County between Tysons Corner and the Loudoun County line.

    Fairfax County stole all that locational property value through mandatory low-density zoning.".

    Who did Fairfax steal from? Themselves?

    "We would have a dozen Lowe's Island developments between Route 7 and the Potomac River in Fairfax County if the free market had been allowed to work.".

    So, Loudoun County doesn't have zoning laws? And, in the absence of zoning laws, the perfect development is Lowe's Island? Why not Lake Point Tower – like in Chicago. You know, 70 story residential skyscrapers with 900 condos in a single building. In fact, why isn't that what was built in Loudoun instead of Lowe's Island? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Point_Tower

    "We would have better roads that would have been built by the developers, and a hundred thousand people would have an easier closer shorter drive to their job in Tysons Corner.".

    Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha – Man, you're killing me with that one. Those really civic minded developers would have made it all better. Have you ever been to Springfield, VA? And if a hundred thousand people want to live closer to their jobs – why don't they just move closer to their jobs. I mean you've proven that Great Falls has artifically low housing prices – c'mon over. Are you going to tell me that the people living in Lowe's Island can't afford to live in Pimmit Hills? Or Arlington? Let's sneak a peak at the homes for sale in 20165 (Lowe's Island). Hmmm… a million, $900,000, $850,000. http://www.weichert.com/search/realestate/SearchResults.aspx?q=20165&minpr=&maxpr=&minbr=&minba=&x=0&y=0. Here are some nice places in Arlington around the same price as the top of the Lowe's Island homes http://www.weichert.com/search/realestate/SearchResults.aspx?cityid=1699&pg=18. Lots of homes on sale at all price levels in Arlington.

    "Without the restrictive zoning rules, huge sections of Fairfax County would be redeveloped at a substantial profit and benefit to both the existing homeowners and the future more numerous more urban dwellers.".

    Yeah, think about how much money Chicago gets from the land under Lake Point Tower. I think you should buy some land in Loudoun County and start building 70 story residential skyscrapers. That would really fire up the old tax receipts. But wait – there are plenty of high rise condos in Tyson's Corner. Why aren't they 70 stories tall? I mean your friends the developers did a great job of road building in Tyson's when they were allowed to create high density there. Traffic just flies through that area. Too bad we didn't let them go up another 50 floors. What? Supply and demand? Oh yeah – that pesky thing again.

    "Even if you take the past theft of property rights, and the tax subsidy issue out of the equation, there is still a massive economic opportunity cost to living on a large lot in Fairfax County. Very few large lot homeowners would be able to resist the substantially higher value they would be offered for redevelopment.".

    I am already planning to tear my home down and build a 70 story skyscraper in its place. In fact, all of my neighbors are planning the same thing. There are going to be 1,000 70 story residential skyscrapers where Great Falls once was. At 900 units per skyscraper, that's 900,000 housing units. Everybody in Fairfax County and everybody in Loudoun County will be able to live in Great Falls. This is brilliant. By the way, Gerry Connolly said that the existing roads will be just fine for the 900,000 housing unit plan – especially if we get Rail to Dulles.

    "To make a peaceful orderly transition to such a freedom oriented world, I would propose that each neighborhood could decide with a 90% (could be lower) majority vote to abolish its zoning.".

    So you moved from macro-economic freelancing to constitutional law freelancing. Counties have no constitutional power in Virginia but now neighborhoods are going to become political entities. After we build our 1,000 skyscrapers in Great Falls we want to sucede from Fairfax County and
    join Loudoun County (where there are no zoning laws). Wait, that's not good enough. We're going to sucede from Virginia and become part of Houston (where there are no zoning laws). Wait, better yet, we're going to sucede from the United States and become part of the Bahamas (where the weather is good and gambling is allowed). Think of the demand for our skyscrapers when we put casinos in the lobbies!

    "That would be more local government than what you have now, although true "local" government is letting each landowner decide for themselves how to develop their property (while of course not emitting toxins onto neighboring properties, etc.).".

    Exactly! I want to build residential skyscrapers without any additional infrastructure. The septic tank will constantly overflow and each of the 900 housing units will only be able to get 1.5 gallons of water per day from the well but these are minor points. The important thing is no zoning. And no toxin emitting. None of that scummy CO2. Well, actually Not Ed – if you ever stop emitting the toxin called CO2 – dial 911 immediately.

    "So Groveton, Great Falls residents are not paying their true location variable costs!".

    Well you have certainly proven that point. Except for not knowing either the variable costs or what people are paying. Other than that, your argument is all but a tautology.

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Is Lord Fairfax the aggrieved party? Hard to shed too many tears for Ole Faxy – what with the king of England just giving a huge chunk of land.”

    See what happens when you create new and unjustified claims for property rights?

    Still, you have to start somewhere.

    RH

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Groveton:

    I just assumed NER’s post was a send up of EMR’s arguments.

    RH

  21. Larry G Avatar

    re: “We would have better roads that would have been built by the developers, and a hundred thousand people would have an easier closer shorter drive to their job in Tysons Corner.”

    you know if that were true …then why would there be opposition?

    Isn’t that one of the major issues in opposition to Tysons – that the developers and planners admit that the traffic will overwhelm the roads around it?

    And I don’t see the developers stepping up to say that they’ll take care of the problem…

    I’m sure I’m not seeing this correctly.. so clue me in.

Leave a Reply