Man Stops Traffic at 17th and K to Demand $200 Million
Morning Roundup: Goodbye, Abe Edition
Judge Throws Out WTU Suit Over Teacher Layoffs
Vegetate to Close at the End of the Month
Morning Roundup: Rain Won't Go Away Edition
It's rare that any of the well-read political blogs based here in Washington take on issues that fit within DCist's mandate to stick mainly to local issues, but when they do, boy howdy, they can really make a mess of things for themselves. The American Prospect's Ezra Klein has already issued a mea culpa for a post he put up late last night on his personal blog, which wondered why there aren't more amenities for wealthy young white people in D.C. like there are in cities such as Portland and Seattle -- but not before receiving harsh rebukes from his peers for basically not knowing what he was talking about.
The whole thing starts off with Klein linking to a new study debunking a Cato Institute study that claimed Portland's efforts at applying New Urbanism in its city planning were ruining the town. Klein then goes on to assert that D.C. is less attractive to educated, young, white people than Portland or Seattle in terms of density of coffee shops, book stores and the like, and to surmise that the reason is that the city government has fewer incentives to attract those sorts of people because of their status as a minority in black-majority Washington.
Moreover, the white people [in D.C.] basically have to be there. You don't move to DC because it's awesome, you move because it's where your work is. So there's little need to construct an affirmative agenda to attract residents.
Photo by IntangibleArts
As you might imagine, this kind of argument has earned Klein some well-deserved bewilderment. In a post titled "Lord Have Mercy," DCist Columnist Ryan Avent wonders on his own blog:
What in the holy name of Jason Campbell is he talking about? Never mind that the percentage of whites in much of Northwest differs substantially from the percentage of whites in the city as a whole. Never mind that whites can vote for the Mayor and D.C. Council and have a government quite concerned with their well-being (if you talk to black residents of the city, you’ll often find they believe the city government is a tad too concerned with the well-being of white people). Is he saying that black people don’t like coffee shops and bookstores? What would they prefer?
Garance Franke Ruta gives Klein a history lesson, and Matt Yglesias and Megan McCardle at the Atlantic blogs chime in, too, retorting that the facts of D.C.'s rapidly changing demographics as a result of the city government's strident efforts to clean up its act are already helping to create the market demands that these sorts of businesses need to thrive -- which is why you're starting to see more and more of them opening up. Alex Massie reaffirms that not only does Klein misunderstand the role of government in attracting these sorts of residents and the businesses they cater to, but that even to the extent that it does play a role, that is exactly what the city has been doing for the last ten years.
Now, keep in mind, Klein has pretty much already apologized in a separate post for most of these incorrect assumptions -- really, he says, he's just wondering about what Brian Beutler asks:
I cannot possibly fathom why D.C. lacks the number of book stores, record stores, coffee shops, night clubs, 24-hour restaurants, etc., etc. that you'd expect based on it's relatively large population of wealthy, single young people. I love my D.C., but I've also found that San Francisco, Seattle, Philadelphia, New York City, Boston, and Chicago all have way, way more urban perks than Washington does.Ryan already has a new post up pondering this problem, positing that perhaps Beutler and Klein don't often leave the Northwest neighborhoods near where they live, and that relatively low residential density in those neighborhoods, though it's on the rise, could be another likely culprit.
The arguments above obviously only skim the surface of what's really going on, so take this post for what it is -- a round-up of the meme so far. We'd also add one more wrinkle to think about: at least in terms of opening certain kinds of new businesses in those neighborhoods where population density is still low but slowly rising, there exists both a real and perceived sentiment among potential entrepreneurs that the obstacles one must be willing to contend with are still piled rather high. To stick with coffee shops, there are a handful of pioneering places that have opened recently, like Azi's, Sidamo, and Big Bear Cafe, which are doing well but still face an unusually high risk of break-ins and robberies for businesses of that kind. You have to be really committed to contributing to some of these changing neighborhoods, and the fact that there are people here willing to do that only speaks directly to the dynamism that exists within D.C.'s culture.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
White people recreate like THIS, but black people recreate like THAT!
This dude needs to hang out with Bill O'Reilly. The two of them can spend hours being astonished at how black people behave.
I rather not have any more bloggers in this city..we already have enough ugly people as it is. peace
i didn't read all of the links after the initial but aside from how he put it i don't see the reason for the ruckus. dc does not have the "amenities" of most cities and no it is not because it is a traditionally majority black population but it must have to do with the general class makeup of the city.
however there is a part of race, i guess you could call it, although culture might be a better term where institutions and businesses exist that serve the population that exists around it. in my neighborhood there are a couple of fish fries a few barber shops and some other businesses that don't necessarily appeal to me but which serve the culture that surrounds it.
what separates dc from other actual cities, among other items, is that there is no in-city developed working-class white culture that fosters creative culture and the benefits that come with it. there are plenty of "white" people in the city and a lot of them are of the upwardly mobile aspiring power class who don't necessarily need "indie" culture. so what you have is a lot of neo-suburban institutions that spring up around them - starbucks, fusion restaurants, brunch spots (i don't know what the hell is going on here).
looking at the last post by ryan, it is probably the case, over time a wider range of businesses will open in various corners of the city where a professional class moves which will serve their desires.
still dc is not a city and does not share in the things that other cities have because this is not a place where people will move just to live, it is a place where people will move to succeed and without that creative class, a true creative class, not a well-heeled class, those institutions that are part of other cities will not follow.
Not to be needlessly provocative, but isn't this part at least pretty much true?
"the white people [in D.C.] basically have to be there. You don't move to DC because it's awesome, you move because it's where your work is"
I don't think you can really draw any bookstore/coffeehouse conclusions from it, but in and of itself it seems right.
Why do so many of us who live here refuse to recognize that D.C. is much smaller than New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, etc.?
There are also some serious economic and ethnic differences between D.C. and places like Seattle and Portland. You simply cannot compare them and draw any conclusions about these sorts of "lifestyles" issues.
So do I have to go to Starbucks as a white person? Is that the place where whites hang out?
It's kind of sad if your idea of a great neighborhood and your resultant quality of life is based on the per-capita of coffee and record shops in your immediate proximity.
Guest 4, I'm here because I love DC for what it is. I could get a job anywhere, but I choose to live here. It has everything I need and want.
Why are there so many self-hating Washingtonians all over the blogs? That's all I see!!! It's getting old!!!
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if DC did everything like Philly, NYC, Boston, Chicago or San Fran THEN IT WOULD BE PHILLY, NYC, BOSTON, CHICAGO or SAN FRAN. If you hate it so much, LEAVE!!!!
I guess it's hard to expect from bloggers who were still in high school on 9/11, but what's lacking here is some historical perspective. The lack of "amenities" in the city aren't racial so much as the result of late-starting development. Ten years ago people were yapping about the New New York and Portland and Seattle, but DC was still relatively underdeveloped and dangerous. So it's not really fair to look at the current state of the city and say "well, that's it?" As a 12-year resident of the city, I am amazed at the rapid change it has undergone since I arrived, mostly for the better. In that vein, Klein draws a false (and embarrassing) causality between the number of white people and the amenities offered by the city -- their increases are both results of better management and a stronger regional economy, rather than the latter following from the former.
MS- uh, duh, yes, and once you're in there, you'll learn the special handshake.
MS- uh, duh, yes, and once you're in there, you'll learn the special handshake.
It's not actually that much smaller than San Francisco, by the way. Or Portland for that matter. Just FYI.
honestly, i also don't know why people think this is an absolute truth:
"the white people [in D.C.] basically have to be there. You don't move to DC because it's awesome, you move because it's where your work is"
i'm white. i moved here on purpose and i do not work in politics. i could get a job anywhere, but love dc.
a lot of people discount those who grew up around dc and came to the city because it offered more but wasn't far from where they grew up.
i love dc and especially love it because it is smaller than new york, boston, etc. i also love that people who move here for jobs often move on out a couple years later.
i'm staying.
People here "refuse to recognize that DC is much smaller than... Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco... and places like Seattle and Portland" because it isn't.
Not including the 2 million people in and around Baltimore, there are about 4.5 million people in the DC metro area - making it about the same size as Boston, 50% larger than greater Atlanta or Miami, and about twice the size of Portland or Seattle. If you're talking about just the District, it's about as large as the City-County of San Francisco, and about 50% larger than the cities of Boston or Seattle proper.
I am so tired of people like Klein (or Atrios, for that matter) talking about how much of an urban wasteland D.C. is when they can't even be bothered to look at the actual urban form of the city. Spend a little less time on K Street and a little more time on U Street and it might seem like a place that doesn't empty out when the offices close, just maybe?
My parents did the nasty and I was born here. Yay!
After reading Mr. Ezra blog about Types of cities, it seems that he was scared or shy to say what was really on his mind. How can you state how vast or extent there is of white folks in porland or seattle with coffe shops or book stores and question why or how come D.C. doesnt have any. Then say D.C. isn't for play, but for work and thats it. You can tell he's new to this city because D.C. used to be(excuse still is) called chocolate city. But now its hard to say that cause people like him are moving in. Now Cluck U chicken shops and blacks are moving NE and SE or to VA and MD cause of the high housing prices. Really all anyone has to do is read the paper, you'll see how thing has change not only in D.C. but in atlanta or chicago and even in harlem.
There is one big difference between these cities and DC. DC economy works by very different rules than SF, Boston Portland, Seattle ect....There is no other national seat of power in which DC has to compete with for jobs.
maybe this dude should hang out with Late Night Shots.
Maybe DC doesnt have as many coffee shops and book stores per capita, but we have great architecture in the monuments, a pretty decent public transit system, FREE museums, lots of athletic teams and people that actually want to live in the city.
I like coffee and books as much as the next person, but I can make it with my own coffeepot and purchase them through amazon and then sit on my rooftop deck.
As someone who has lived in all three cities, let me just say DC is by far the most dynamic and interesting city of them all -- that is, unless you ONLY like to surround yourself w/ bland WHITE hipsters. As for Jeffrey, get a clue my man, DC (by itself) is bigger (or essentially as big) as many of the cities that you mention and, more importantly, the DC area is far bigger than all but Chicago and New York -- again based on the the cities that you refer to in your oddly put together list (in fact, the DC area now has more than 6 million people and is larger than Philadelphia -- w/out B'more). I for one do not get the love so many people feel for the Pacific Northwest -- but then again I LIVED there.
Two comments:
1) I recall reading somewhere that DC has the highest concentration of Starbucks per capita. Still, despite being a single young white guy, I stay away from Starbucks, Caribou, Cosi, and the like. They are boring.
2) Having lived in both the DC metro and Boston metro areas, I think its fair to compare them. They are of comparable size, have highly professional workforces, are relatively wealthy compared to the rest of the country, and are similar in many other ways.
Unless you're a "guest" of the state (a.k.a in prison) no one is forced to live anywhere...even for work (get another job!). I lived here, moved away for work and quit my job and chose another career path just so I could move back to D.C. If you don't like it or it doesn't fulfill your needs, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
If this is truly a problem, it was created by "white" people who neglected DC for decades and focused on the suburban areas where they lived. So if white people in DC want more places where they can meet other like-minded white people, they should build them in DC. Then I can avoid them.
Double that, Guest 22. If you look further back in DC history -- before the riots, before the beltway, before suburbanization -- the city was incredibly dynamic (also almost twice as large). The people who celebrate U Street's history aren't joking when they say it ranked up with Harlem as a locus of black cultural and intellectual output. I'm not viewing the era through rose-tinted glasses -- the city had a lot going against it, not in the least fairly strict segregation. But for all that, it definitely has a history to be proud of outside the federal centers.
I agree that a problem with DC is a lack of indigenous white culture. While much of DC's black community grew up here and people feel a connection to each other and their neighborhoods through various social and cultural ties, the white people are mostly transplants without institutions or rituals to tie them together. So they don't value the cultural life of the city enough to stay in it more than a few years before heading for the suburbs. They also don't respect the life of the city's black populace enough because there's no shared cultural connection.
I know these are gross overgeneralizations but tell me there's not some truth in them. All white people have to tie them together in this town is the Redskins, talking about traffic and expressing thinly veiled racism.
I'm a white noVA native for what it's worth.
I'd like to echo guest #whatever by saying that this:
"the white people [in D.C.] basically have to be there. You don't move to DC because it's awesome, you move because it's where your work is"
is so not true. I love it here. I moved here because I love it here. I have a lot of family here. There also happen to be a lot of jobs here in my non-politics line of work. I'm sorry so many people seem to hate it here, but perhaps they should go out and find something to enjoy rather than sitting around blaming their problems on the city.
It's true, DC is seriously lacking a dynamic, creative "white" working class demographic. Baltimore has a very large white working class and its creative and cultural institutions show what DC is really missing. Becuase cities like Baltimore have this class they develop a true connection to the city, its progress, and ties that are hard to recreate in this city. I live in NE DC, but would much rather live in a place that has a more dynamic demographic. I'm tired of rich "white yuppies" and "poverty pimps".
OT: Just want to point out that that this has been a constructive, racism-free discussion with lots of thoughtful comments...and almost all 'guests.'
Just pointing it out FWIW as future comment policies are deliberated.
We now resume your regularly scheduled programming. Thanks guests!
I think #24 is right on. I don't want to overlook/undervalue some of the (mostly white) unique cultural things happening in DC, but it is true that the professional class here - of all racial/ethnic backgrounds - is in general not invested in local culture.
I think that's why many of the blogs - whether political blogs taking a break to talk local issues or the Shaw/Petworth/Columbia Heights gentrification blogs - focus so much on amenities (or crime) - nothing deeper.
Guest 28: From a static perspective, you may be right, but having been here a while, I can see that changing very rapidly. Compare it to 10 years ago, when young professionals thought twice about even living in the city, and there were very few places to go out (well, safely). Maybe it's just more obvious because you can see the debates on neighborhood chat sites, but there seems to be a lot of people who both identify themselves as professional and who care a lot about the city. A lot of it is the result of hyperspeed gentrification -- once you buy a place, you're going to care more about what's going on around it -- but in this sense, it's not a bad thing.
I think lack of progress in DC is largely a result of the weird government structure that allows one person or small vocal groups stop ANYTHING even though they are in the minority. The ANCs need to be stripped fo power and free markets left to do their work. Race has nothing to do with it, bad government does.
Guest #28 again:
Good points 29.
Also, I want to clarify that when I said "I don't want to overlook/undervalue some of the (mostly white) unique cultural things happening in DC",, I was NOT intending to say that most of the unique local culture was white - I was trying to distinguish between local African American and Latino cultural elements and the young, mostly white middle-class cultural activity that some folks think is missing.
Portland and Seattle offer vastly different amenities because they attract a different kind of young person than DC. The lack of a "coffee shop and bookstore" scene might have more to do with the absence of a significant group of artsy coffee/bookstore types than some type of failure on DC's part. The cultural amenities of DC are many; my two favorite things are free museums/events and the diversity of people and cuisine.
Several others have pointed out, rather wisely, that DC is still developing and recovering from its 70s/80s nadir. There's a great deal left to be cleaned up (schools, crime, etc.) before the city is able to attract a greater number of dynamic people of all races and ages. New communities arise overnight. Those of us who are here now will get to watch DC grow up right before our eyes.
I'll chime in here and lend my voice to the many others here who voluntarily "choose" to live in DC. I love the city, and I love living here. Moving here was a conscious decision on my part--I grew up in the midwest but loved my trips and vacations to DC, so the opportunity to move here was a chance I couldn't pass up. DC may not have the nightlife of a New York, but I don't view that as a bad thing. What we *do* have are breath-taking and awe-inspiring monuments, fabulous (free!) museums, gorgeous parks and recreational activities, fabulous restaurants, culture galore, stunning architecture and--yes--enough bookstores, coffee shops, bars and indie retailers to satusfy all but the most hardened mid-90s Seattle hipster.
Like others, I too scratch my head at the self-hating that is pervasive throughout the city. It's almost as if people feel the need to apologize that they live in such a bland, stale "non"-city. The grass is always greener, my friends, and besides...I doubt all 6 million people who live in the DC area were *forced* to. There are a few people who actually like living here.
Ahem, new communities DO NOT arise overnight.
Great point post 32.
I'll bet there are a bunch of Portlanders who bitch about the lack of luncheon seminars on development in Indochina in their rose city. Or really good places to meet and mingle with Congressional staffers.
Well, maybe just one or two.
i think it's a little annoying and strange that so many of the comments here are from over-emotional dc boosters who think anyone who wouldn't love it here is crazy. look - anyone without a bias or some hefty amount of money invested in the real estate market here would admit that this place just does not have as much to offer when you compare it to other places of similar size. yeah yeah, the grass is always greener and dc is what you make it. the ancs just dont let anything develop here and so many people here just come for school or to spend a few years in a political job. it's just the way it is.
"i think it's a little annoying and strange that so many of the comments here are from over-emotional dc boosters who think anyone who wouldn't love it here is crazy. "
I think it's a little annoying when people hyperbolize and grossly misrepresent what is being said. Who said anyone who wouldn't want to live in DC is crazy? No one here is saying that.
"so many people here just come for school or to spend a few years in a political job"
Really? Then why has the population boomed here over the last decade? Did people *just* realize that there are schools and political jobs available here? This is a very outmoded way of thinking. "People only come here for political reasons." Well, in all of the people I know in this city and its environs--and I know quite a few--not a single one of them work in politics, or in any field related to politics. None of them are in school, either. A majority of them moved here from various parts of the country, and most enjoy it here and plan to remain.
I have lived in Chicago and went to school in the Boston area, and I would prefer DC to either of those locales. Does that make me some sort of DC homer, or do I have low standards? I just love it when people try to tell me how much I'm missing by living in DC and not some other "real" city.
Amen 37! JPK, you obviously dine on donkey dork!
"All white people have to tie them together in this town is the Redskins, talking about traffic and expressing thinly veiled racism. "
Nonsense. We also have the bathrooms at Union Station. And mayonnaise, which I hear all white people love.
I would appreciate criticism levied against DC if, for once, it was actually valid.
The statement that DC is much smaller than some of the cities that you listed is simply not true. There are many ways to judge a city's size/influence, e.g. city proper population, metro population, urbanized area population, advertising market.
Further clouding the issue is the fact that Baltimore and Washington are intertwined in many ways including economy, media, and demographics, and will continue to blend into each other. The same issue arises when you consider Miami, for instance. The actual size of the city and its population is surprisingly small, around 400K. But Miami is merely the focal point of a sprawling area that could include Ft. Lauderdal and West Palm Beach, depending on you linked the cities.
When you consider all the ways to rank cities, some things become clear. There's the first tier of very large cities in the US: NYC, LA, and Chicago. The second tier would include places such as Boston, SF, Philly, and yes, DC. Seattle and especially Portland would not be in this tier.
But discussing city size in an argument about the livability of a city is rather pointless after you pass a certain population minimum, in my opinion. Paris is, after all, many times smaller than Tokyo, but does that mean it sucks in comparison?
somebody just said i "dine on donkey dork." i don't know what that means, but i'm sure i could find a lot more restaurants serving "donkey dork" in new york . . .
dcist's policy on guest comments is looking more and more like a good idea.
If you could find more donkey dork in NYC, then by all means, GO THERE!!!! Or do you have a political job and real estate interests here? Because you know, that's really the only reason people are here.
And how does JPK say anything more than guest?
Signed,
John who works in Finance and rents in the city!!!!
PS - Enjoy your donkey dork!
Then why are you reading the guest comments, JPK?
well, guest #42, i'm not looking for donkey dork and will not be moving to nyc. i do have a political job here. that is my career, i don't plan on changing my career, so i'm living in dc and making the best of it. is that ok?
i don't think anyone can say that dc is not more transitory than a lot of other places. just compare the number of going away parties you and your friends here go to with those your friends in other cities go to. all i was saying in my comment was that this situation coupled with the power of the ancs holds dc back.
i don't think i have more to say than someone who would comment here as a guest, it's just that what i did say in my comment was a much more constructive contribution to this debate than than telling someone they eat donkey dork.
naalex, how is media in Baltimore and Washington intertwined? Baltimore television stations are not available in D.C., and visa versa. The Washington Post and the Baltimore Sun are not available in the respective cities locally. And radio? Well, is there still such a thing as broadcast radio? And what intertwined stations do exist only constitute about 20% of the dial.
Your overly general assumption that people who are saying they chose to live here and are happy about it are doing so simply because they have investments in real estate and/or political job was as ridiculous as me saying you dine on donkey dork, and that was my point.
And, mr. reading comprehension, my point was not that you have more to say. It was that JPK means as much to anyone as guest. We know nothing more about you than we would about anyone who signs in as a guest, except maybe that you made similarly idiotic comments in previous posts.
to #46, who i guess is the same as #43 - everyone can be their own judge of what's idiotic but i don't think any rational person would think anything i've said on here is as idiotic as telling someone they eat donkey dork. i stand by everything i've said on here.
"i don't think any rational person would think anything i've said on here is as idiotic as telling someone they eat donkey dork."
It's not idiotic (and I'm not the guest who made the donkey dork comment--I don't know what that is, and I try to at least maintain some degree of civility in what I write) but I do think your generalizations about the constitution of DC's citizenry represent an outdated way of thinking about DC. I get that you aren't too enamored with this city--fine. But there are those of us out there who moved here for no other reason than the fact that we *like* the city and what it has to offer. I don't own any real estate here, I don't work in politics, but I very much enjoy living in DC. I know a number of people who feel similarly. Go figure. And contrary to your assertions, I don't think people who don't want to live here are "crazy". To each their own. I just disagree with those who claim that DC's nothing more than a transitory stop up the corporate latter for most people.
You're free to stand by your assertions, but it doesn't make them any more accurate.
JPK said: "just compare the number of going away parties you and your friends here go to with those your friends in other cities go to."
Dude, my DC friend base is pretty stable. I think you're making the mistake of extrapolating from your group of friends - people in politics and the people who hang out with them - to the entire population of the city.
DC doesn't cater enough to white yuppies? HA!!!! Wasn't that like, the whole point of the Williams administration? The sheer volume of yoga studios & condos that have sprung up in my neighborhood (U Street) in the last decade tells me otherwise. There's even a WINE BAR opening up soon. Maybe this guy should take a trip outside of upper caucasia and see what else the city has to offer.
this is a side comment, but baltimore and dc are about as different as anacostia and columbia heights.... fewer type "a" peeps in the former... not that you asked.
I'd rather hear from the guy talking about donkey dork than from a racist like guest 50.
What's very telling about this whole conversation is how transitional DC is right now. Fans of the city can complain that it's critics live in narrow worlds, but the fact is that a sizable number of such people exist -- I'd bet more than in most cities -- and their existence does point to something unique about the city. Plus, it's only fairly recently that the image of the city they describe was largely accurate: the city was not particularly dynamic, as a whole. The city has been coming around for a decade, but I think it's only in the last few years that the "facts on the ground" have become readily apparent. So I''m not saying that people who still diss it are right, but I'm willing to cut them a little slack, for now.
52: How is 50's post racist? I think you're overly sensitive.
it's called a double standard, my friend. if somebody posted something about black this or lantino that or asian that they would be seen as a racist. i'm just saying that it goes both ways and i'm not going to accept it regardless who it's being pointed at. and you're right - i am sensitive because it's crap like that which keeps these so-called white yuppies, which i call neighbors, looking at me, a black man, like i don't like them, like i don't want them in my neighborhood
...hmmm. Or maybe different people have different preferences for living areas.
Just a thought.
What a ridiculous conversation.
Klein doesn't really make any points about DC's cultural vaccuum than most of the other bloggers - dcist included - have not made themselves. Unfortunately, he committed the unpardonable mistake of introducing race into the equation. If there is one thing that every DC neophyte should know, it is that - in this city - you cannot have a reasonable discussion about anything if race is involved; even tangentially.
There's some truth on both sides of this. There are some very cool things about DC. For instance, we have a lot more trees than some cities. No, really. Once you go to Philly or NYC you miss the trees. And we have a ton of high-falutin' things like opera, a lot of it worldclass. We have gorgeous residential architecture (even if we could use a bit more variety). You don't notice how beautiful DC residential architecture is until you go somewhere else.
But I do think we suffer by comparison to some other cities, as far as neighborhood amenities. Not just coffee shops. But decent neighborhood restaurants, cool corner bars, etc. Part of that is zoning - a lot of cities allow for restaurants and bars on corners in residential areas. DC seems to fight hard to prevent that sort of thing.
But the bigger reason is crime. DC is high crime. Considerably safer than we were 10 years ago, but still very high crime. It's just really hard to open a restaurant or such here outside of a few 'safer' areas. You get robbed out of existence, your patrons don't feel safe going to your place, etc.
DC will live or die by how we handle crime.
How do our crime rates compare to other cities?
Are they really that much worse, Hillman? I'm genuinely curious (and yet too lazy to look it up).
I'm just curious about what you are basing your argument on. I'm not saying you are wrong, but if it's based on your own personal experience, well then mine is totally and completely different.
There are a hell of a lot of businesses opening, many of them in "transitional" neighborhoods. Are they all crazy or stupid?
Not including the 2 million people in and around Baltimore, there are about 4.5 million people in the DC metro area - making it about the same size as Boston, 50% larger than greater Atlanta or Miami, and about twice the size of Portland or Seattle. If you're talking about just the District, it's about as large as the City-County of San Francisco, and about 50% larger than the cities of Boston or Seattle proper.
A quick check of census data on the Web shows that the D.C. metro area (about 5.3 million) is smaller than the metro area of Miami (about 5.5 million) and larger than Atlanta's (about 5.14 million). D.C. is clearly not 50% larger than either of these areas.
The same goes for Boston and Seattle if you're talking about the population within their city limits. In fact, the District's population is less than either city. Boston's population is 590,763 and Seattle's is 582,454, compared with D.C.'s 581,530.
Guest 60, I believe the point is that D.C. compares very favorably *in size* to all the cities you mentioned. When you're talking about population differences of simply a few thousand, who's "larger" is a moot question. When Baltimore's 2+ million people are factored in, the D.C.-Balt. area becomes the 5th largest metropolitan region in the nation.
But size has jack-all to do with the quality of a city. Houston is a huge city, and it sucks. Phoenix has tons of people and a nice dry climate, but no one would include it on a list of great cities. Detroit is massive, and it's becoming a textbook example for urban blight and decay. And so on and so forth.
Hillman laid out a pretty argument from both sides of this issue. D.C. zoning restrictions and ANC system can be frustratingly prohibitive, and there's no question that D.C. as a whole has been "late to the game" in terms of the reinvigoration of its urban core. But strolling around neighborhoods like Shaw, H St., Columbia Heights, U St., A-M, Barracks Row, Penn Quarter, etc. there's no question that that is changing. People who left DC 10 years ago would likely barely recognize parts of it today...and I'd venture a guess that the same will be true 10 years from now. In the meantime, there *is* a lot to like about this city, even if we aren't New York. There are days when I wouldn't trade the views of the city as seen from the Jefferson Memorial for anything.
Guest 61:
I pulled some date from city-data.com
I chose robberies and assaults, the two crimes I though were most typical for 'street crimes' that would give people a sense of a neighborhood being unsafe and would impede development.
DC robberies and assaults, per 100,000 residents, was 636 and 700, respectively
Seattle: 277 and 403
SF: 410 and 352
NY: 304 and 344
Austin: 170 and 270
We had pretty much twice as much as each of these. Sometimes even more.
Philly, on the other hand, had numbers quite similar to ours.
You mention several DC neighborhoods that are developing nice amenities. But please remember that those areas are actually quite small, if you look at the entire city as a whole. We often forget that the whole 'development' of Logan is really just the movement of the 'safer' zone about six blocks East. This amount of change is laughable when you can still drive for miles in NE, SE, and parts of NW and see very little but boarded up storefronts, liquor stores, and other obvious signs of blight. Sortof puts the progress made into perspective.
Hillman-
Guest 60 here--FYI, I wasn't making any statements about crime. Perhaps you were confusing me with Guest 59. (An easy mistake...we share the same name after all).
At any rate, thanks for the statistics.
"Sortof puts the progress made into perspective."
Yes, but as others have noted, you've got to start somewhere. That areas such as Logan, Columbia Heights, U St. and Penn Quarter are now considered "desirable" neighborhoods speaks volumes. And neighborhoods like Shaw, Petworth, Mt. Pleasant and Trinidad/H St. aren't too far behind. (Not to mention the sizeable parts of Capitol Hill that have improved, as well as the forthcoming developments in lower SE and SW as part of the stadium development.)
Like I said, there's no question that the District has been late to the development game. But don't sell it short, either. Far from laughable, that some previously gutted neighborhoods have nearly turned around completely in the last 10-15 years is something to be lauded.
64: You make some valid points. I didn't mean to demean the accomplishments in the neighborhoods you mention. Maybe my use of the term 'laughable' was wasn't a good thing. I just meant to remind us that the considerable majority of the city isn't seeing the same gains.
I too believe DC has a bright future, especially considering what the city once was. But it is all dependent on crime.
Aye carumba! What was this numbskull thinking when he posted that? Equally lame was his non-apology where he seemed determined to defend his original argument.
That areas such as Logan, Columbia Heights, U St. and Penn Quarter are now considered "desirable" neighborhoods speaks volumes. And neighborhoods like Shaw, Petworth, Mt. Pleasant and Trinidad/H St. aren't too far behind.
---------
Mt Pleasant is more desirable with more expensive housing than Shaw, Petworth, Trinidad, Columbia Heights and U St. It's older and skews older, so it doesn't compete with the tweens at Penn Quarter. I would put it on-par with Logan or a bit below.
This amount of change is laughable when you can still drive for miles in NE, SE, and parts of NW and see very little but boarded up storefronts, liquor stores, and other obvious signs of blight.
---------
Please point out one mile (not even miles) in NE or NW where this is true. I was just on H ST NE over the weekend and while it's not great, there's very little blight left.
Also, there is nothing more bizarre than saying that DC attracts people just for political reasons. I had friends in San Francisco and they complained mightily that their city attracted the techies and dotcommers. I have friends in NYC who talk about the media people and writers hogging the apartments. I know people in Chicago who literally mocked people who worked at the Board of Trade. I know most of all, people in Seattle who made fun of Microsofties.
I should mention that If you live in Alexandria or Arlington or definitely Fairfax County you would never, ever consider yourself "intertwined" with Baltimore. That's really only true for some of the Maryland suburbs. I have friends in Falls Church who have never driven to Baltimore after one disastrous 2 hour drive to an Orioles game. It's just a lot farther and they don't have good access to the MARC train (though please let's not make MARC part of this argument).
Guest 50 here. For the record, I am white, and I grew up here in DC. I don't think I hate my own race, but I do hate seeing many of the black-owned businesses in my neighborhood being pushed out to make way for businesses that cater to more affluent residents (many of which also happen to be owned by white people). Not all of us white people are rich, and not all of us are "newcomers" either!
Yes, but... I remember one awful conversation I overheard where the guys on the street were complaining about all the white people moving in and one elderly woman scolded them, telling them about a "good man" who moved in across the street who's a doctor and his wife is a teacher. they told her that he and his wife were, you know... I'm not going to say it, but you know what the couple was called. So really... are the coffee shops and yoga studios really not targeting people of color? I know an African-American hippy who doess yoga and drinks coffee and goes to poetry slams and carries around Maya Angelou books. What's the real question with the changes on H st?