THE IMPORTANCE OF HOUSING LOCATION

THE LOCATION AND SIZE OF DWELLINGS IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT IF THE AFFORDABLE AND ACCESSIBLE HOUSING CRISIS IS TO BE SOLVED.

For TMT and CJD here is a draft EMR is circulating for comment:

DRAFT OPEN LETTER

18 May 2010

Professor Steven S. Fuller, PhD
Director, Center for Regional Analysis
George Mason University

Dear Steve:

Our paths have not crossed in some time. Your report “The Future of the Washington Metropolitan Area Economy” released on 8 April 2010 and your ‘Commentary’ published in Capital Business on 10 May 2010 suggests that it is time to touch base.

JOBS / HOUSING IMBALANCE

A recurring theme of your academic work and consulting efforts for as long as we can remember has been the negative impact of a Jobs / Housing ImBalance in the National Capital SubRegion. This area is variously known as the Washington Metropolitan Area, the Washington dominated portion of the Washington – Baltimore Consolidated Metropolitan Area, ‘Greater Washington,’ ‘the State of Potomac,’ the Wash COG service area plus surrounding municipal jurisdictions – or as it is termed in the 10 May 2010 Capital Business ‘Commentary’ – ‘The Washington metropolitan area’ – no capitals).

The POTENTIAL of a Job / Housing ImBalance in the National Capital SubRegion that you identify in your 8 April report and cite in the 10 May ‘Commentary’ is far more important today than any previously projected Jobs / Housing ImBalance.

That is the reason for this letter.

Action to avoid the POTENTIAL of the Jobs / Housing ImBalance which you have projected is critically important to the economic well-being of every citizen, Household, Enterprise, Agency and Institution in the National Capital SubRegion. You underscore the reasons for this fact in your 10 May ‘Commentary.’

THE SHAPE OF THE FUTURE

The National Capital SubRegion – by whatever name – is today profoundly different than it was just three years ago. And it will never again be ‘the way it was’ in the periodic Boom periods during in the past five decades.

As you know the projections of growth in Jobs and residents in the Greater Washington Area (aka, The National Capital SubRegion) by you, by Wash COG and by others have been quite accurate in past decades. That ‘accuracy’ has, however, depended on the continual expansion of what might be called ‘Ever-Greater Washington.’ The pellmell radial expansion has been driven by forces examined in The Shape of the Future. The geographic expansion has resulted in dysfunctional settlement patterns and large areas of vacant and underutilized land. Much of this vacant and underutilized land lies well inside the logical location of the Clear Edge around the Core of the National Capital SubRegion.

Going forward, the critical issue will be insuring that there are functional locations for future Urban activities IF the projected Jobs – and the concomitant demand for shelter – become a reality.

A critical factor in Projected Jobs becoming reality will be Affordable and Accessible Housing Affordable near the Jobs. In addition, Affordable and Accessible Housing will be needed for those who will fill the jobs of those who retire over the next two decades. This is critical since the dwellings the retirees now occupy – if they are Accessible – are NOT yet Affordable.

The Jobs / Housing ImBalance cannot be side-stepped in the future as it has in the past by continually expanding the Urbanized area in the National Capital SubRegion.

The finite limit on global resources – reflected, for example, in rising energy costs as well as other indicators – mean that it will not be possible to work in the National Capital SubRegion (aka, Washington Metropolitan Area, etc.) and live ‘somewhere else’ even if citizens apply Telework and other tactics.

The potential Jobs / Housing ImBalance identified in your 8 April report will NOT just result in longer commutes. This has been the result over the recent decades.

In the Fundamentally Transformed SubRegional, Regional, MegaRegional, continental and global economic context, the Potential Jobs and the Potential Job Holders will locate inside the Clear Edge or they will migrate to OTHER SubRegions, New Urban Regions or MegaRegions. The alternative is that the Potential for these new Jobs will not materialize as you suggest in your 10 May ‘Commentary.’

Living outside Radius = 30 Miles from the Centroid and working in the Core of the National Capital SubRegion – much less in the Zentrum of the SubRegion – will continue to grow more and more costly. The scatteration of Households by Unit and in Dooryard-, Cluster- and Neighborhood-scale enclaves will continue to grow less attractive from many other perspectives as well. A fair allocation of all locations-variable costs will accelerate this trend. This fair allocation of costs is an inevitable result of tightening economic conditions.

‘Drive-until-you-qualify’ – including driving into ‘another’ SubRegion – is an idea that is no longer viable. In the 20 year span you examine in the 8 April report, inter-SubRegional commuting will grow to be completely out of reach of the vast majority of workers, especially those in the lower half of the Ziggurat who have been forced into long commutes in the past.

As “Same House-Same Builder-Different Location” comparisons clearly demonstrate it has been those at the bottom of the economic Ziggurat who have been relegated to dysfunctional locations from a Jobs / Housing Balance perspective.

The Housing Plus Transportation (H + T) Index by Center for Neighborhood Technology documents this reality. It is important to note that the interpretation of this data at it applies to the outer Radius Bands of the SubRegion by some is very misleading.

The high cost of energy is exacerbated by a vast over-build of ‘Wrong Size House / Wrong Location.’ This is evident from Radial Analysis of foreclosures and underwater mortgages.

WHERE NEW JOBS WILL END UP

New Jobs upon which to base economic prosperity in future decades will agglomerate in attractive and functional New Urban Regions if they are generated anywhere. Attractive Regions will be those that provide functional and sustainable human settlement patterns. As evidenced by recent economic trends, these Regions will provide locations for Jobs AND Affordable and Accessible Housing as well as Services / Recreation / Amenity. They will provide Affordable and Accessible Housing IN CLOSE PROXIMITY to Jobs for workers of all skill levels.

In the future, Affordable and Accessible housing in the National Capital SubRegion MUST exist in close proximity to Jobs / Services / Recreation / Amenity. Otherwise the most desirable Jobs and the most qualified potential Job holders will relocate to Regions that provide functional settlement patterns. Central to attracting a qualified work force will require attention to the parameters for meeting the needs of ‘the creative class.’

The alternative is that the Potential to create new economic activity will evaporate. The Potential for new Jobs will evaporate just as relatively inexpensive and comfortable air travel has evaporated. That was then, this is now.

The shape of the future will be a result of physics and economics, not of policy or political ideology.

COMPLICATING FACTORS

There are a number of factors that will complicate the evolution of effective SubRegional and Regional strategies.

Some question the scale of the Job growth Potential in the current nation-state, continental and global context but that is NOT the critical issue. In order for the Projected Jobs to evolve in the National Capital SubRegion there must be places for those Jobs to locate AND places for Affordable and Accessible Housing as well as Services / Recreation and Amenity to support those workers.

Using the term ‘worker’ in the last paragraph underscores the importance of ‘workforce’ housing as opposed to the past emphasis on ‘home ownership’ and promoting a Household’s primary residence as an ‘investment.’

There will be a need for a place for workers to live AND that place must be Affordable and Accessible. In most cases, that means the Housing must be closer to the Jobs than is now the case for the current Job holders. This also applies to those who are attracted Potential new Jobs and for those who will replace retirees but who cannot afford the housing that is now available.

Increasing pressure to limit immigration will focus pressure on housing for those in the lower half of the Ziggurat. This housing must be near Jobs rather than relying on distant cheap labor enclaves. The cheap labor enclaves have moved farther and farther from the Centroid in past decades. The location of these enclaves can be identified by mapping the locations of low-end foreclosures in the past three years.

In your 8 April report you identified two million workers who will retire over the next 20 years. This cohort poses both an opportunity and a challenge. Recent surveys indicate many would like to stay in the Region after they retire. The majority would prefer to ‘retire in place.’ However, they may not be able to do that for a range of economic reasons.

There is a vast over build of Single Household Detached Dwellings. Many of over-sized dwellings are the product of the Wrong Size House / Wrong Location epidemic that resulted from the 90s and 00s booms and the myth that buying more house than one needs was a ‘good investment.’

Many of the Wrong Size / Wrong Location dwellings are owned by near-future retirees. Finding ways to more efficiently exchange dwellings and transfer equity in dwellings could help move those who believe they need a larger house to meet their Household demands without building more too-big dwellings. Accessory dwellings, granny flats and granny pods could also help meet the need for flexible shelter for older citizens.

Many have more house than they ‘need’ but often those houses are NOT in the right place to meet the needs of future Job holders. Subdivision recycling, parcel consolidation and equity transfer strategies will be needed to implement flexible strategies.

One of the underlying barriers to achieving a Jobs / Housing Balance strategy has been the result of not clearly identifying the parameters of the ‘real Region’ and its components. Even more important is the failure to quantify the land necessary to provide dwellings of a size that the workforce can afford.

That is why SYNERGY has worked for 20 years to articulate the parameters and boundaries of the New Urban Region as well as the SubRegions, Communities, Community components and most recently MegaRegions. This work has resulted in the evolution of a robust Vocabulary and the articulation of a comprehensive Conceptual Framework with which to understand human settlement patterns. In addition, SYNERGY has developed Regional Metrics and applied Radial Analysis to quantify land requirements in a way which citizens can understand.

Finally, differences between your projections and those of Wash COG need to be reconciled. The self-employed, part-time and contract workers need to be factored into the Regional and SubRegional Strategies.

THE CRITICAL REALITY

The overarching concern your study raises is that if SubRegional and Regional cooperation and coordination does not make a rapid 180 degree reversal to provide the opportunity for a Jobs / Housing BALANCE in the Core of the SubRegion, many Jobs will NEVER be created.

The employment base will atrophy and contribute to SubRegional and Regional deflation. If Jobs and potential Job holders cannot migrate to other Regions it will contribute to MegaRegional, continental and global deflation and depression.

A SILVER LINING

There is a potential ‘win-win’ scenario for the National Capital SubRegion as well as the Washington-Baltimore New Urban Region and its residents IF enough citizens grasp reality very soon.

There is more than enough vacant and underutilized land within the Clear Edge around the Core of the National Capital SubRegion to meet the demand for all the Jobs and Houses you project as well as space for the Services, Recreation and Amenity to serve these new Urban activities.

If the OPPORTUNITY for evolving functional patterns and densities of Urban land uses exists, then the POTENTIAL for substantial economic activity will exist. Without locational opportunities, there will be no chance for achieving the SubRegion’s Potential and evolving Balance in the Communities that make up the National Capital SubRegion.

FACTS

The availability of vacant and underutilized land for new Jobs / Houses / Services / Recreation / and Amenity was made crystal clear nearly a decade ago in “Blueprint for a Better Region.” This reality and the centrality of the vast majority of key jobs can be confirmed through Radial Analysis of the June 2002 Wash COG study “Metropolitan Washington Regional Activity Centers.” This very important, broad-based initiative was sidetracked by political pressure and dog-in-the-manger municipalism (sometimes called anti-Regionalism).

It is fortunate that the concept of Activity Centers was rescued and there is an ongoing effort to coordinate these the evolution of these Activity Centers with the Potential growth of Jobs and Housing in the next round of COG projections and the 2010 Census. To achieve this Potential there must be reality-based Quantification of Activity Center capacity and a rational allocation of economic activity to achieve Balance.

THE WAY FORWARD

What is missing from the tool box necessary to evolve functional human settlement patterns that will accommodate Potential Job growth and support prosperous, happy and safe residents?

1. A robust Vocabulary with which to articulate >

2. A comprehensive Conceptual Framework which will allow citizens and their leaders to >

3. Apply science based metrics to Quantify settlement patterns so that it is possible to evolve >

4. A broad based citizen consensus which supports >

5. A Balance of Jobs / Housing / Services / Recreation / Amenity in every Community in the National Capital SubRegion.

There a number of specific tools such as “Next Higher Component RePlanning / ReZoning” that can implement a SubRegional Sketch Plan base on the METRO armature and the Activity Centers.

Some decentralization of Jobs will be desirable. However, decentralization will ONLY be useful if the new relocations contribute to creation of Balance at the Alpha Village- and Alpha Community-scales. This is true for BOTH Balanced Communities inside the Clear Edges around the Cores of SubRegions and for Disaggregated-But-Balanced Communities outside the Clear Edges around the SubRegional Cores. This process is the exact opposite of the BRAC relocation process which lacked the five tools listed above.

It will be possible for a small number of workers to live within walking distance of an intra-Regional (inter-SubRegional) shared-vehicle system (e.g. commuter rail) station. But an ImBalance of ‘commuters’ will result in dysfunction in the ‘residence Communities.’

The ONLY REAL HELP that can be provided to ‘commuters’ from OUTSIDE the Core of New Urban Regions (and the Cores of major SubRegions such as the National Capital SubRegion) is to help them become non-commuters.

A PLACE TO START

The vacant and underutilized land that must be made ready for Urban land uses in order to void a Jobs / Housing ImBalance includes land within 0.5 miles of existing and planned METRO station platforms.

Some Business-As-Usual supporters and geographic expansion advocates like to pretend that there is not enough capacity in the METRO system to serve functional station-area settlement patterns. That is because of the failure to evolve Balanced settlement patterns in the METRO station areas. This lack of Balance is why most of the METRO trains leave most of the METRO stations most of the time ESSENTIALLY EMPTY while at the same time there is peak hour / peak direction crowding and congestion on the METRO system.

There has also been a failure to evolve shared-vehicle systems to supplement and support the METRO system. SYNERGY has advocated Transformations to achieve system-wide Balance since the mid 80s as documented in the earliest versions of “It is Time to Fundamentally Rethink METRO and Mobility in the National Capital SubRegion” recently updated in TRILO-G.

The bottom line is that there must be system-wide Balance of shared-vehicle system capacity with the travel demand generated by the settlement pattern – especially the settlement pattern in the station-areas.

BEYOND AUTONOMOBILES

Perhaps most important, citizens must come to understand that in the future, Large, Private vehicles cannot be the MAIN or even the MOST IMPORTANT component of the Mobility and Access system serving ANY large New Urban Region for the reasons spelled out in PART FOUR of TRILO-G.

Every large Urban agglomeration on the planet has gotten MORE congested when new facilities are built to bring additional Large, Private vehicles inside Clear Edges. In every case the Mobility and Access of the average and the median traveler (based on income / cost, time and distance) has gotten worse. In the US of A, the Core of every large New Urban Region has brown more congested as documented by the Texas Transportation Institutes Annual Mobility Analysis. Those Regions that built more lane miles of Roadway to accommodate Large, Private vehicles grew more congested than those that relied on more sustainable strategies.

Those who suffer the most loss of Mobility and Access by increasing the use of Large, Private vehicles (aka, Autonomobiles) are those in the bottom half of the Ziggurat.

In addition, the per square foot values of built environment document that more functional settlement patterns not dominated by Autonomobiles are heavily favored by the market.

It is especially tragic that many try to perpetuate the Myth of Automobility in a Region where federal Agencies have already provided most of the basic infrastructure needed for a functional alternative.

AN OVERARCHING REALITY

The first three decades of EMRs professional career our work focused on the interests of Enterprises. During the last two decades the efforts have been dedicated to developing the Vocabulary, Conceptual Frameworks, metrics to Quantify settlement patterns.

In working with Institutions and with governance practitioners it is clear that, no matter how much the ‘leaders’ agree with the need for Fundamental Transformations based on these tools, it requires a Critical Mass of citizens who support them.

In a democracy, the only way to achieve a sustainable trajectory is to build a consensus among a Critical Mass of citizens. The key to evolving that consensus is citizen education that makes it clear that the individual and collective best interest of citizens is Fundamental Transformations of settlement pattern, governance structure and economic systems.

Among the leaders of the group that sponsored your 8 April report are the leaders of the National Capital SubRegions premier educational Institutions. They must articulate an educational process to achieve a Critical Mass of citizen support.

SUMMARY

A Business-As-Usual expansion of what is called ‘Greater Washington’ that relies on Autonomobiles for Mobility and Access will not accommodate Affordable and Accessible Housing near Jobs. Thus it will not support the Potential of Job growth.

As noted in OUT OF THE OILY SLIME, the leadership of the National Capital SubRegions has wasted a decade since a consensus was reached on a promising path to a sustainable future.

The same powerful economic, social and physical forces that cause dysfunctional human settlement patterns work to perpetuate those settlement patterns.

As noted above, in a democracy, the only way to achieve a sustainable trajectory is to build a consensus among a Critical Mass of citizens. The leaders of the National Capital SubRegions premier educational Institutions must articulate an educational process to achieve a Critical Mass of citizen support.

One element is to evolve functional Regional governance as called for by “Regional Leadership and Governance for the National Capital Region” which was also presented on 8 April.

The chief obstacle to achieving a sustainable strategy is to convince a working majority of the citizens of all the municipal jurisdictions in the National Capital SubRegion that they need to support Fundamental Transformation to a functional SubRegional and Regional governance structure.

Good luck in that important work.

E M Risse
SYNERGY


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

21 responses to “THE IMPORTANCE OF HOUSING LOCATION”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Did you actually send this?

    RH

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Region's economy to nearly double in next 20 years, economist says

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Region_s-economy-to-nearly-double-in-next-20-years_-economist-says-90318957.html#ixzz0oJagktbT

    The Washington area's economy will nearly double over the next 20 years, bringing in more than 1 million new jobs but also forcing local leaders to face tough questions about how to accommodate them, a new study predicts.

    The District and its suburbs will see their gross regional product grow by more than 94 percent over the next two decades, George Mason University economist Stephen Fuller predicts in a new study by the 2030 Group, a nonprofit think tank founded by area businessmen. The study, released Thursday, predicts that the Washington area will be one of the nation's fastest-growing economies, behind Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth, through 2030.

    The study predicts that up to 1.6 million new jobs will be created in the area; the jobs will bring in about 1.7 million new residents through 2030.

    With all of these new people and jobs, the question is where to put them. Local leaders are weighing major development projects from Tysons Corner to high-rise developments around the New Carrollton Metro station. Area leaders have committed to "smart growth," building high-density, mixed-used neighborhoods close to mass transit.

    But there are worries about the area's aging infrastructure.

    "Now we have to think about this," Fuller told the Washington Examiner, "and we're going to have to pay the piper."

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Region_s-economy-to-nearly-double-in-next-20-years_-economist-says-90318957.html#ixzz0oJaWHSEF

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Region_s-economy-to-nearly-double-in-next-20-years_-economist-says-90318957.html#ixzz0oJaLOZia

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Region_s-economy-to-nearly-double-in-next-20-years_-economist-says-90318957.html#ixzz0oJa2QRrn

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "[T]he 2030 Group, a nonprofit think tank founded by area businessmen." While the 2030 Group may be a nonprofit, it's no think tank. It's yet one more lobbying pig with ruby red lipstick intended to get taxpayers to fund infrastructure for some big real estate developers — the same crowd that has been pushing for taxpayer subsidies for years and years.

    "Now we have to think about this," Fuller told the Washington Examiner, "and we're going to have to pay the piper." There's a good workable and successful model to fund infrastructure improvements to handle development. Both Fairfax and Loudoun Counties have created special tax districts to fund major improvements to Route 28 in western Fairfax and eastern Loudoun Counties. In exchange for added density and protection against down-zoning and down-planning, the commercial landowners in the corridor are funding 75% of the costs for improving Route 28. The project and the corridor are generally regarded as successful.

    Take this model and use it throughout NoVA. If the infrastructure improvements are valuable and affordable, they will be built and the growth can occur. If the infrastructure is not valuable and affordable, it won't get built and the growth will occur somewhere else.

    Why should the rest of us subsidize more real estate development?

    TMT

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    TMT said:

    "In exchange for added density and protection against down-zoning and down-planning, the commercial landowners in the corridor are funding 75% of the costs for improving Route 28. The project and the corridor are generally regarded as successful."

    TMT:

    You may have missed an earlier comment on this issue. It is only regarded as successful but those who benefit and those who do not understand all the traffic that vacant land is now poised to generate.

    The Route 28 tax district will pay for going from four to six lanes and small interchanges.

    The land uses allowed under the tax district deal will generate 16 lanes of traffic and require huge interchanges OR a major new, unfunded shared-vehicle system.

    The 2030 group would LOVE this sort of deal to build the "Outer Beltway," widen I-66 from Gainesville to to I-81, re-widen I-66 from Gainesville to the Belway and create an Interstate from Lynchburg to Gainesville among other projects.

    You think the subsidy for METRO to Tysons and beyone is bad…

    F TRB S

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    EMR writes: "As noted above, in a democracy, the only way to achieve a sustainable trajectory is to build a consensus among a Critical Mass of citizens. The leaders of the National Capital SubRegions premier educational Institutions must articulate an educational process to achieve a Critical Mass of citizen support."

    Amen!!!

    Consensus will not likely develop on any development option as the so-called leaders cannot demonstrate that anything they propose to do benefits anyone except the taxpayer subsidized developers and increase campaign contributions for elected officials.

    The question no one seems to be able to answer is: "If development is so beneficial to the average resident or small business owner, why have Fairfax County real estate taxes only continued to increase at rates in excess of inflation, while the quality of life continues to decrease?" When this can be answered, we will probably get the consensus that EMR correctly notes is needed. Until then, keep your musket loaded and your powder dry, the developers are on the loose.

    TMT

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    TMT. you said

    "Take this model and use it throughout NoVA. If the infrastructure improvements are valuable and affordable, they will be built and the growth can occur. If the infrastructure is not valuable and affordable, it won't get built and the growth will occur somewhere else."

    I believe that F TRB S is correct and you have been hoodwinked.

    AZA

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Why should the rest of us subsidize more real estate development?"

    The answer is we should not.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    F TRB S – But if the landowners are paying 75% of the tab, they won't push for more development than they can fund. If they push for all that traffic, such that Route 28 needs major and expensive upgrades, their rents will become non-uncompetitive with other markets. If they grow without the road upgrades, their buildings will become non-competitive with other markets.

    I'm not arguing for or against EMR's theories, just trying to get the developers to pay for most of the costs that they cause. The Tysons crowd wants taxpayers to pay for at least 55% of the infrastructure costs. If they had to pay 75% of the costs, they won't want to build as much.

    Keep in mind that the 527 law has changed the rules of the game.

    TMT

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Til Hazel and his crowd would never pay 75% of the costs for anything. Make them pay those costs and uneconomic, subsidized development will slow. That world is better than the one we live in now.

    TMT

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "Why should the rest of us subsidize more real estate development?"

    Because you will be better off as a result.

    If you do not chip in for the improvements and you wind up better off as a result of them, then YOU are te one being subsidized.

    Compare the per capita income of Fauquier county to that of Loudoun.

    Compare the per capita assessed value of property in Loudoun vs Fauquier.

    30- 40 years ago they were equal, and now the citizens of Loudoun own more and earn more.

    They also pay more taxes, but it is a drop in the bucket compared to what they have gained.

    What they have lost, is the Fauquier county bucolic charm. But, as a result of the differene in other values, we can now put a price on that charm, and it costs every citizen inthe county around $6000 per year.

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ray, doesn't the 75-25 cost splitting formula seem fair to you? At least when there are large public faclity needs and the potential for significant up-planning.

    TMT

  12. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    TMT:

    Let me take a moment to try to sort out a couple of things

    I believe that both F TRB S and AZA were confused by the quotation marks (or lack there of) in your post of 4:30 PM on 18 May.

    It appears that they both thought that you were making the original statement on the Route 28 Tax District but you were, it appears, quoting the Washington Examiner’s quotes of Steve Fuller.

    It appears, however, from your post of 4:53 on the 18th in response to F TRB S that you do agree with Fuller on the value of the Route 28 Tax District.

    Both F TRB S and AZA were basing their comments on EMRs analysis of several years ago.

    The last time EMR looked the public had bailed out the tax district on several occasions. How much is not a mater of public record as far as EMR knows. So the owners did not pay the full 75 percent of the cost of the initial projects but even if they did, this serves only 25 percent of the traffic generated by their projects.

    Even if they did pay 75 percent of the first 25 percent, that means they will only pay 18.75 percent of the total cost of the traffic they will create if the Route 28 Tax District is ‘built out.” The public will pay 81.25 percent, even worse than the Tysons case.

    Do you really think they will stop building when they get to the point that the traffic maxes out capacity for which they paid 75 percent?

    You know better than that.

    Under that logic developers would not overbuild capacity when they paid nothing extra, right?

    Many of the land owners who have been paying into the Tax District have not yet built anything. True they are paying the tax on vacant land but it is still an added tax.

    They are going to pay that forever without developing if they can in the hopes that if things get bad enough, Agencies will kick in again and again?

    After all this is growth and is generating tax base even if in the wrong place….

    EMR

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I think EMR is right but would like to go on to RH’s statement about the glorious benefits of development in Loudoun vs. Fauquier.

    His argument is based on the assumption of continued ‘growth’ ad infinitum.

    His arguments has the same flavor as those of Jack A. Goldstone (the Virginia E. And John T. Hazel, Jr Professor at GMU – See The New Population Bomb in the Jan – Feb Foreign Affairs.

    Do we see a smoking gun as to who is paying RH to shovel this stuff?

    CJD

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    His argument is based on the assumption of continued ‘growth’ ad infinitum.

    Where do you get that idea?

    My argument makes no statement about continuation, it merely reports the historical fact that at one time Loudound and Fauquier were almost exactly equal on two measuremetns of wealth.

    One county pursued growth and one pusued conservation. The county that pursued growth is now wealthier in terms of the original argument, but it has lost the conservation areas that FAuquier still has.

    Therefore, you can establish a current price or cost for retaining those conservation areas.

    That is ALL my argument said, and you cannot defeat it by claiming it says something else.

    RH

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Do we see a smoking gun as to who is paying RH to shovel this stuff?.

    I am a private citizen. I have no clients other than my hay customers and no one pays me for my writing.

    "This stuff" is mostlynot even my own, but comes from respected environmental economists.

    If you have a problem with "this stuff" explain what it is.

    If you cannot defeat an argument, then go ahead and make persaonal attacks: I consider them proof that the argument is good, and it touched someones preconcieved notions in a way that is intellectually uncomfortable.

    I have never met any of those persons you mention, but I ma friendly with a remote member of the Hazel clan.

    RH

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I don't know what is fair, nor do I have any preconcieved notions.

    My argument is that we can't agree on a set of rules to decide how to figure out what is fair, let alone what the allocation might be.

    You think the present system is corrupt. The scales are crooked. So we have a PROCEDURE for testing balances used for measure.

    I suggest that development rights belong to the citizenry, becuase they are the ones affected, not "the county".

    Let citizens buy, sell, or hold those rights as they see fit.

    If they would rather sit on those rights an keep Tysons as it is,so be it. But I suspect that when actual money is on the table TMT will discover that people act differently than when they can be opposed to something for free.

    Now, if they want to be opposed, they have to convince themselves that the increased taxes will be greater than the value of their development right chits. They will lose the value of those chits if they don't sell, and if they do they may face higher taxes.

    That is one PROCEDURE for deciding what is fair. There may be many others, but noone here has offered one, yet.

    RH

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    True they are paying the tax on vacant land but it is still an added tax.

    You mean like the agricultural tax is an ADDITIONAL tax on top of my residential taxes? A tax that pays for services not actually provided?

    I'm glad to hear that you think this is unfair.

    RH

  18. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    EMR, et al., I'm looking for incremental progress. Adding density at the four Tysons Rail stations only within the TOD areas, with mixed use, mandatory affordable housing within the TOD areas, strong parking restrictions, and hefty developer contributions towards infrastructure, could be incremental progress. Similarly, the imposition of a 75-25 cost-splitting formula versus the 45-55 cost-splitting formula proposed by the county staff on behalf of the developers would be incremental progress. I'm trying to secularize the state religion here. Progress is progress.

    And I agree that I did not handle the quotation marks re S. Fuller correctly and apologize for any confusion I caused.

    TMT

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Most people are rational about housing location. They include house costs and transportation costs in their planning.

    RH

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    TMT:

    You said"

    "I'm looking for incremental progress. Adding density at the four Tysons Rail stations only within the TOD areas, with mixed use, mandatory affordable housing within the TOD areas, strong parking restrictions, and hefty developer contributions towards infrastructure, could be incremental progress."

    All this is good.

    "Similarly, the imposition of a 75-25 cost-splitting formula versus the 45-55 cost-splitting formula proposed by the county staff on behalf of the developers would be incremental progress."

    The problem here is simple. The way we read this the Route 28 formula results in a 82.25percent share for the public, not a 25 perscent share.

    Dig into the Route 28 issue and I think you will agree.

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    5/20/10 11:23 AM – GHve me references to the documents that support your position. I have a conferenc scheduled on another matter with the general counsel for the Route 28 tax district. I'd be happy to ask a couple more questions. But I need some documentation.

    TMT

Leave a Reply