text:
Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | The diyAudio Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
7th September 2007, 12:26 AM | #1 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
'POP' sound when unit is turned off
I just installed a SONY HU, 4 x 80 W amp and a 500W Class D. There was a 'POP' sound when I turned the system off and when the CD is changing track. The sound is not loud but obvious.
The Head unit was fine when it was installed in my old car with different amps. Is it problem with the Head unit or wiring? |
7th September 2007, 01:31 AM | #2 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Louisiana
It sounds like there may be a problem with the muting circuit in the head unit. If there is no problem with engine noise, the problem is almost certainly in the head unit.
You may also want to... Check the head unit's ground connection. Check the system with only one amp connected at a time. If/when you disconnect the RCA cables from the amp, make sure that they cannot make contact with a 12v power source.
Links >> Basic Car Audio Amp Repair * Basic Car Audio Electronics * New Site * Basic Switching Power Supply Design * Basic Computer Skills << Links |
9th September 2007, 03:25 AM | #3 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Louis y ana
There are a lot of head unit rca ground problems lately.. eh??
Simple, cheap way to test your headunit rca grounds if you don't have a meter or aren't very electronically inclined: 1-Buy a "GROUND LOOP ISOLATOR" from your local audio store or wal mart. (It is a small box with a pair of rca jacks on both sides, designed to reduce or eliminate ground loop issues. It contains two transformers, one for each channel. It couples the signal from the headunit with the amplifier by electromagnetic induction, so there is absolutely no direct electrical connection between the two. It will keep your amp from frying your headunits internal rca ground circuits if the amp ever tries to draw current through the tiny rca cables) 2-Plug it in between the rca cables for the amp - either behind the radio or at the amp, whichever is easier it doesn't matter. 3-If the subs stop playing after doing this, your headunit rca solder joints are toasted. Either repair the deck or get another one 4-If the subs are still playing but the noise is still there: 1a- your headunit preamp circuit(s) may be faulty 2a- your amp input rca grounds may be toasted If you identify the problem, keep the ground loop isolator connected. This way if the amp ever malfunctions it will not be able to harm the headunit. This is good cheap insurance for most audio setups for anyone else who may be reading. I'm sure a lot of people will say "I already knew this, its old news " but for others who may find it useful, don't mention it. |
10th September 2007, 03:36 AM | #4 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Will the ground loop isolator have any effect to the sound quality?
10th September 2007, 03:53 AM | #5 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Louis y ana
When using for the sub amp, you won't hear the difference. I wouldn't use one for the mid/highs amp permanently, but they are good for troubleshooting. If you install one and the sound completely quits, the ground path is missing in either the radio or amp, so it makes an easy diagnosis tool. I used to suggest them to every customer who bought an amp to install themself, back when we kept more in stock. I'm sure someone here will comment on how their finely tuned ears can hear the difference running bass, or how they can use their oscilliscope or spectrum analyzer to see there is a difference, but meh... whatever.
10th September 2007, 07:56 AM | #6 | |
diyAudio Member
In theory it has to, as anything inline with the signal can only detract from signal quality... |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pop when amp is turned off | boostin1989 | Solid State | 6 | 10th October 2006 04:10 PM |
Why FR may sound better with dedicated HF unit | keladrin | Full Range | 10 | 25th May 2006 10:43 AM |
buzzing and pop sound when fender power amp is turned on | zaboomafoo | Everything Else | 0 | 27th August 2004 05:12 PM |
Leach amp has hum only when turned off! | kiwi_abroad | Solid State | 12 | 26th March 2004 03:17 PM |
New To Site? | Need Help? |


text:
Shop now and get Free Value Shipping on most orders over $49 to the contiguous 48 states, DC and to all U.S. Military APO/FPO/DPO addresses.
We want to ensure that making a return is as easy and hassle-free as possible! If for any reason you decide that your purchase just isn't for you, simply return the item within 30 days of receipt and we'll cover the cost of return shipping. Learn more about our Return Policy.
You are a truly lucky person. This is because you've found Mark AR AR15 Rifle Scopes. These AR15 Rifle Scopes tie together as a unique subsection of Leupold, and have common features and a dependable performance level. Take a look at all the Leupold Mark AR AR15 Rifle Scopes we have below. If you have issues contact us. Our product specialists can help you work out if Mark AR AR15 Rifle Scopes are perfect for you, or if a different collection Leupold AR15 Rifle Scopes would be a better fit. If you're wondering about how well these Mark AR AR15 Rifle Scopes perform, check out our Leupold Mark AR AR15 Rifle Scopes Reviews. They were written by customers just like you and give useful insights. And remember that most orders greater than $49 get free shipping!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Morrison's St. Louis directory
New York Life Ins. Co. , Thoams E.Courtenay, , ag't , nw cornorthwest corner Main
and Olive ups.
and Olive ups.
Nichols, Thomas, wrecker , res ws Seventh, bnbetween Carr and Biddle.
Nichols, Sarah Mrs., boarding house , 101 Green.
Nichols, Alexander, steamboat carpenter , res ws Ninth, bnbetween La-
beaume and Brooklyn.
beaume and Brooklyn.
Nicholson, David, grocer , ne cornortheast corner Fourth and Market, res ss Spruce,
bnbetween Fourth and Fifth.
bnbetween Fourth and Fifth.
Nick, Adam, carpenter , nsnorth-side Carroll, bnbetween Seventh and Fulton.
Nicol, Grace, reses Seventh, bnbetween Spruce and Poplar.
Nicol, G., Missouri seed store , 1 sw corsouthwest corner Main and Market, ups.
Nicolet, Augustus J., 45 Second, bnbetween Chesnut and Pine, resresidence same.
Nicolet, Henry, printer , (Republican office.)
Nidelet, Stephen F., resresidence 134 Fifth, bnbetween Poplar and Cerre.
NideletSylvester L., M. D., office 70 Vine, bnbetween Third and Fourth,
resresidence 134 Fifth, bnbetween Cerre and Poplar.
resresidence 134 Fifth, bnbetween Cerre and Poplar.
Niedner, Moritz, book and job printer , office Weld building, corcorner
Third & Chesnut, ups, res Tayon av, w of Chouteau av.avenue
Third & Chesnut, ups, res Tayon av, w of Chouteau av.avenue
Nielius, James, porter , res ss Chesnut, bnbetween Sixth and Seventh.
Nieman, Jacob F., boot and shoe maker , 99 Second, bnbetween Almond &
Niemen, Franc, teamster , res ns Spring, bnbetween Second and Broadway.
Niemeyer, Henry, coffee house , nw cornorthwest corner Park avavenue & Seventh.
Nierman, Frederick W., shoemaker , shop and resresidence es Ninth, bnbetween
O'Fallon and Cass av.avenue
O'Fallon and Cass av.avenue
Nieters, Louis, tailor , 29 Locust, bnbetween Second and Main.
Nievergelder, Louis, (Nievergelder & Co.company ,) 85 Chesnut.
Nighton, Richard, laborer , res ss Wash, bnbetween Twelfth & Thirteenth.
Niles, Catharine Mrs., milliner , 141 Market, bnbetween Fifth and Sixth.
Nims, Lemuel, foreman omnibus stable , reses Ninth, bnbetween Benton
and Warren.
and Warren.
Nisbet, Robert N.clerk , sw corsouthwest corner Main and Olive, res ws Fifth, bnbetween
Locust and St. Charles.
Locust and St. Charles.
Nisbet, William, agent Manhattan Life Ins. Co. , of N. Y., off. sw
cor Main and Vine, resresidence 80 Fifth, bnbetween Locust and St. Charles.
cor Main and Vine, resresidence 80 Fifth, bnbetween Locust and St. Charles.
Nivet, Therese, bakery , 28 Walnut, bnbetween Main and Second.
Nixon, George, deputy liquor inspector , and city guager, off.office 111 nnorth
Main, resresidence 112 Green, bnbetween Third and Fourth.
Main, resresidence 112 Green, bnbetween Third and Fourth.


text:
Watchdog: Should Justices Toal, Pleicones recuse themselves from Harrell matter?
A watchdog citizens' group has sent Chief Justice Jean Toal a letter asking that she and Associate Justice Costa Pleicones consider recusing themselves if they are called upon to decide civil or criminal questions involving House Speaker Bobby Harrell.
"We make this request in view of the fact that Speaker Harrell took an active role in trying to influence the votes of House members in the recent election of candidates for the office of chief justice of the Supreme Court," wrote John Crangle, executive director of Common Cause of South Carolina.
Earlier this year, Harrell successfully campaigned to corral House votes for Toal in a bitterly fought race for a 10-year term in a chief justice election.
On Feb. 5, Toal squeaked out a victory over Pleicones, winning 95-74, and observers believe Harrell's backing was one of the elements that allowed Toal to beat Pleicones.
If just 11 lawmakers of 170 House and Senate lawmakers had changed their votes, Toal would have lost her powerful post, in which she presides over the $60-million-a-year judicial empire of state judges, court records and a vast Internet-connected court records system.
- Related content
Judge to AG Wilson: Stop SLED and grand jury probe of House Speaker Harrell
SC watchdog group: No plan to send Harrell complaint to House panel
In South Carolina, the Legislature elects state judges and the five state Supreme Court justices.
"Both Toal and Pleicones would be perceived as having some kind of bias — either for or against Harrell," Crangle said in his letter. "The potential bias of Toal is more obvious."
Crangle made it clear he was not accusing either Toal or Pleicones of being prejudiced in a matter involving Harrell — merely that because of public perceptions, the justices should consider recusing themselves.
Recusals by sitting justices happen on occasion, and other judges are appointed to fill their seats.
Crangle made his request in a February letter, about a month after Attorney General Alan Wilson announced he would seek a state grand jury investigation of potential criminal ethics violations concerning Harrell.
On March 5, Supreme Court clerk Dan Sherouse wrote Crangle, acknowledging receipt of the letter and saying, "Unless and until such a matter does come before this Court or the chief justice, it would be premature for either Chief Justice Toal or Justice Pleicones to consider recusing themselves."
Editor's Choice Videos
Join the Discussion
The State is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.


text: Utah Mom Buys All of PacSun Store's 'Indecent' T-Shirts 02/19/2014 02:18 AM 02/19/2014 02:19 AM A mother upset about "indecent" T-shirts on display at a Utah mall found a quick if not especially convenient way to remove them: She bought every last one. By BRADY McCOMBS A mother upset about "indecent" T-shirts on display at a Utah mall found a quick if not especially convenient way to remove them: She bought every last one.Judy Cox and her 18-year-old son were shopping Saturday at the University Mall in Orem, about 40 miles south of Salt Lake City, when she saw the shirts in the window of a PacSun store.The shirts featured pictures of scantily dressed models in provocative poses.Cox said she complained about the window display to a store manager and was told the T-shirts couldn't be taken down without approval from the corporate office. She then bought all 19 T-shirts in stock, for a total of $567. She says she plans to return them later, toward the end of the chain store's 60-day return period.The shirts cost about $28 each on the website for PacSun, which sells beach clothes for teenagers and young adults."These shirts clearly cross a boundary that is continually being pushed on our children in images on the Internet, television and when our families shop in the mall," Cox said in an email to The Associated Press.The story was first reported by The Daily Herald of Provo.An employee at the Orem store said Tuesday she wasn't authorized to speak about the issue and referred questions to the company's Orange County, Calif., corporate headquarters. PacSun CEO Gary Schoenfeld said in an emailed statement the company takes pride in the clothes and products it sells, which are inspired by music, art, fashion and action sports."While customer feedback is important to us, we remain committed to the selection of brands and apparel available in our stores," Schoenfeld said in the statement.Orem is a city of about 90,000 in ultraconservative Utah County that uses the motto "Family City USA." Most residents belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which frowns on pornography and encourages its youth to dress and act modestly.Cox met with Orem city attorney Greg Stephens on Tuesday to discuss whether the images on the T-shirts violated city code.Stephens said he told Cox that she first needed to file a complaint with police. He said police would then review the issue and decide whether it needed to be passed on to the city attorney, a process that could take weeks.City code prohibits anyone from putting "explicit sexual material" on public display. The city defines that as "any material that appeals to a prurient interest in sex and depicts nudity, actual or simulated sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse."Cox said she wants her actions to make clear that these types of images are not acceptable for public display."I hope my efforts will inspire others to speak up within their communities," Cox said in an email. "You don't have to purchase $600 worth of T-shirts, but you can express your concerns to businesses and corporations who promote the display of pornography to children."Longtime mall manager Rob Kallas said the display is down now because Cox bought all the shirts. He said the PacSun store manager told him she was embarrassed to put up the display but was following instructions from corporate managers.Kallas said this is the first time he's received complaints about PacSun. But in the past, others have complained about images in the windows of Victoria's Secret. That's led to Orem city attorneys at least once asking the store to remove an image, he said.Kallas didn't see the T-shirts in question until getting an email from Cox, but he said he agrees that they were inappropriate. Victoria's Secret has images of women in lingerie, but their clientele is different, he said."This is a store that caters to junior high and high school age kids," said Kallas, mall manager for 40 years. "Some of the poses were provocative and were inappropriate for a store catering to young people."PacSun has 600 stores across the United States, the company's website shows. Copyright 2014 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Page: [[$index + 1]]


text:
Sign Up ForFREE Pattern Info!
Tell A Friend!
Out of Stock
With Our "Find This For Me" Service we notify you via email once we have stock!
Piece Code: K2NF
Piece Name: New French Hollow Knife
Size: 9 1/2 in
Piece Code: F2
Piece Name: Fork
Size: 8 1/2 in
Piece Code: TS
Piece Name: Teaspoon
Size: 6 3/4 in
Piece Code: PLS
Piece Name: Place/Oval Soup Spoon


text:
KJOS Festival Ensembles 2 Flute
Sku #H65888000000000
Flute/Piccolo Method Books
- Write a Review
- Seen a Lower Price? Click Here.
45 day price guarantee, 45 day return policy, 100% secure shopping
Playing in a variety of ensembles is an important component in the complete education of young instrumentalists. Festival Ensembles, Books 1 and 2 present collections of easy, flexibly scored classical ensemble repertoire perfect for festivals, concerts, summer camps, and varied chamber performance throughout the year.
With Kjos Multiple Option Scoring each part book includes melody and harmony lines for each piece. This allows unlimited flexibility in the size of the group, instrumentation, and who has the melody! Students will love mixing and matching different combinations of instruments on melody and harmony lines. Flexible scoring makes Festival Ensembles great for groups with non-standard instrumentation, too. !
Highlights include:
- Kjos Multiple Option Scoring, playable for solos, ensembles, and full concert band
- Perfect for festivals, concerts, summer camps, and private study!
- Limited ranges
- Easy rhythms
- Wide variety of musical styles and genres


text:
Summer Camp is an enriching experience that every child should be able to enjoy. Through the generosity of local donors, each year we are able to provide at risk children access to a camp experience. Camp slots are provided for free or at greatly reduced prices.
Priority is given to families that have utilized other services offered by Beverly Bootstraps and can prove financial need.
Call the office at 978-927-1561 and speak with our Case Management Team.
Summer Camp spots are generously provided by Art Works at the Waring School, Camp Half Moon, Camp Mitchman, Gain@Gus Summer Enrichment Program at Glen Urquhart School, Girl Scout Camp, Prep@Pingree at Pingree School, and Summer Quest.
Thanks to these programs, we were able to send 49 children to camp this summer!


text:
How do we solve the housing affordability crisis?
This is the last in a 5-part series about how the Washington metropolitan area can provide housing options for its growing workforce. Read part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4.The Washington region is a victim of its own success when it comes to housing affordability. Our region's strong and steady economic growth continues to generate high demand for housing from new workers. Higher wage workers compete for units, pushing up prices and rents, and leading to affordability problems along the entire income spectrum.
Coupled with this high level of demand is a slate of obstacles to housing production, including a difficult regulatory environment at the local, state, and federal levels for the construction of new housing units, fear of growth and change among current residents, and lack of regional coordination.
What will it take to solve the housing affordability problem in the Washington region? There is no single simple solution, of course, but there are ways to address many of the factors hampering housing affordability.
Demand. Prices and rents are particularly high in parts of the region that have attributes and neighborhood amenities that are in demand. Increasing the supply of these types of neighborhoods would help alleviate price pressures. When the supply of something goes up (and demand stays the same), prices fall.
While we can't move existing neighborhoods closer to job centers, we can facilitate development around transit, encourage amenity-diverse development, and incentivize high-quality construction. Places like the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor— Whereas in the past we built single-family houses on suburban lots, future demand will be for more urban and smaller units, close to jobs, shopping, recreation, and other amenities. If local governments and developers are aware of this new demand, and set up the appropriate framework to achieve that type of development, the overall supply will increase and price pressures will not be as extreme. Their ability to do so will in large part depend on solving the next four issues.
Planning, zoning, and application processes. Counties and cities in the Washington area need to get ahead of the demand by preparing master plans and sector or neighborhood plans that allow mixed uses, higher densities, and transit infrastructure in certain areas where jobs and housing will concentrate. Once the right plans are in place, it is much easier for developers to tailor their development plans in the desired direction and also easier (in terms of time and money) to get plans approved.
Local governments also need to review and revise their zoning ordinances to provide more flexibility, allow mixed uses where they were previously prohibited, and encourage the development of more affordable housing. Montgomery and DC are currently reviewing their zoning ordinances, and it is likely that these two jurisdictions will be able to make the right types of adjustments to support more appropriate levels of housing development which will encourage housing affordability.
Developers recognize that their projects need to pay for some public infrastructure and community amenities. Done right, these contributions enhance their projects' chances for market success. The problem has been the complexity of development approval processes, and their lack of transparency and predictability. Developers would prefer to know up front what they need to contribute (whether it is a fixed dollar amount per unit or per square foot) rather than to think they have reached agreement only to find a new reviewing agency has additional requests.
When plans, zoning, and development applications align, it reduces costs and timeframes for development. This provides some margin to reduce housing prices.
Neighborhood opposition. Fear of change is natural and understandable. The demand for more urban lifestyles is increasing. Yet we are trying to undo more than 30 years of sprawl and suburban living— One solution is to defuse the fear of the unknown. Our suburban housing stock will continue to be available to people who prefer that lifestyle. But there are places in the metropolitan area that are well suited to a more urban form of development, and those places are the ones where more and higher density housing close to transit and jobs can be built. Each jurisdiction should clearly identify those places in master plans, legalize them through zoning changes, and educate residents about them.
To educate people, leaders and developers need to share information about successful projects, defuse fears of traffic impacts by making data on traffic counts widely available, and document environmental and lifestyle benefits of this new (though old) form of development. Financial and economic data exist too, but tend to be less persuasive to current residents. Education, information, and understanding won't happen overnight, but it is important to have an ongoing conversation.
State and federal regulations. Reducing the impact of state and federal transportation and environmental regulations on the cost of housing production is a bit more difficult, and seems out of reach of the local jurisdictions.
Perhaps the best way to do this is to elect representatives to state houses and the US Congress who are conscious of the impact of regulations on the cost of providing new housing units. This will require the local population gaining an understanding of the relationship between regulation and housing affordability. It is time for advocates of housing affordability to transcend the local government level and be heard at higher levels of government.
Regional coordination. The region's political fragmentation makes coordinated action difficult, but regional coordination and cooperation are necessary to ensure the continued high quality of life in the metro area. Furthermore, regional coordination needs to include all groups that have a stake in the economic vitality and housing availability in the region— Groups like the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments that convene local leaders to discuss regional issues are critically important to keeping these policy concerns in the public eye. However, the problem cannot be solved by discussion alone: regional coordination on housing issues requires true commitment in the form of money and leadership.
The Washington DC metro area would benefit from the creation of a regional housing trust fund1, a source of dedicated funding not tied to a particular jurisdiction and contributed to from both the public and private sectors. The fund's resources could be used to subsidize construction of affordable housing in the locations around the region where there is the greatest need.
Although the District of Columbia and the states of Maryland and Virginia also have housing trust funds (with different funding mechanisms— Our region's trust fund should also be supported by both the public sector (e.g. local governments) and the private sector.2 The business community has a tremendous stake in the availability of housing in the region.
We must meet the challenge
There are no easy answers here, but there is a set of approaches that could individually and together ease the housing affordability crisis and to ensure that we produce enough housing to support our region's economic vitality and sustain our quality of life.
Just as we need DC, Maryland, and Virginia to work together, and the region's component counties and independent cities, we also need the public and private sectors to collaborate on regional housing needs. Regional leadership, setting housing affordability as a priority over other priorities, and education of existing residents are all prerequisites to solving the problem. If we don't put these solutions to work soon, our region runs the risk of diminished economic prospects in the future.
Guess what, if you don't have a lot of money, you don't get nice things. That is a fact of life. That means you live in places that people with more money probably chose not to.
That is not a crisis. That is called the real world.
The problem is that there is a lack of supply of housing in areas that people - who have a choice - want to live. While these areas are diverse, typically they offer most or all of the following features: good schools, good access to transit, low crime, and the ability to walk to restaurants, stores, parks, etc. The article correctly identifies the solution as increasing the supply of neighborhoods that offer these features.
Of course, this is easier said than done. For example, as stated in the piece yesterday, PG County is missing a massive opportunity by not focusing mixed-use development around its multitude of Metro stations. This is highly unfortunate for everyone in the region, since there are only so many other places the region's expected growth can go without requiring significant new transportation infrastructure.
Not sure I follow this logic. Part of the problem is that it conflates basic services (decent schools, decent transit access, etc) as if they were amenities in a condo - like granite countertops or stainless steel appliances.
Those places are cheaper, but that doesn't make them cheap. Those negatives all impose costs. However, I'm not sure why people keep putting those social and economic negative qualities out there as evidence that we don't really have an issue with housing supply.
do a dozen unrelated men living in a older 3bR house in disrepair in an aging suburb count as priced out? two or more families sharing an apartment in an aging walkup apt complex? People paying over half their income toward rent?
There may not be many people sleeping outdoors in this region - but there are lots of people in housing situations that are very stressful, and that there really is no excuse for. Especially as many of the solutions simply involve getting out of the way of the free market. Or doing things like adding transit to enable density, that have substantial side benefits unrelated to housing.
I think the OP was quite supportive of expanding options in less glamorous nabes. But since lower income folks cannot pay rents that will drive market rate development in such places, adding more housing in those places means either A. Direct govt investment/subsidy or B. Making those places desirable to residents with choice - which means adding transit AND amenities.
Also have we ever admitted that there is a cost to other tenants in providing required low-income units in a development or is that still an un-mentionable.
so an immigrant family, with a job in NoVa, is supposed to move to a high crime area in EOTR DC, and accept a long commute (either very long via transit, or fairly long in a cheap auto that they can barely afford given the wear and tear the long commute imposes). A high crime area with substandard schools no less.
its perhaps not surprising that they choose to double or triple up in substandard apts instead.
If what people are saying is that decreasing crime in EOTR DC or close in PG, or improving schools in those areas, is a good idea and will improve housing choices in the region, I agree (though of course when those happen prices in those places will increas). But I don't see why waiting on those good things should preclude other policy changes that will more directly address the problem.
its odd to mention, since the OP does not call for such a policy in their long list of recommendations.
I would also note that in Arlington, where low income units are traded for density bonuses, there is probably no increase in cost to other tenants.
To a certain extent, yes. The notion that a person or family is entitled to live in a neighborhood that is close to jobs, in a good school district, etc. is very odd. Money provides choices. Lack of money decreases those choices. It isn't the government's responsibility to maximize convenience for everyone.
As Alex B and AWITC point out, there are additional costs to those places so just hand-waving it away isn't a solution. We need to create more places with good connections and more housing in existing demand areas to soak up demand.
Also have we ever admitted that there is a cost to other tenants in providing required low-income units in a development or is that still an un-mentionable.
There is no requirement for low-income units unless you want to build more than is allowed by-right (IZ). And in that case, you end up making more profit than you would by-right. Doesn't look like a cost to me, looks like a benefit to both low-income people (more housing) and developers (more profit). And since rents are set by market rates, there isn't an extra cost to other tenants, because the developer can't get more per-unit for the larger building in the same place than the smaller one.
"Money provides choices. Lack of money decreases those choices."
Running our society that way IS a choice. But even if you accept that distribution of life chances based on market earnings is just - why should we accept govt interventions in the housing market that AGGRAVATE the housing situation of the poor?
"It isn't the government's responsibility to maximize convenience for everyone."
I would suggest that its the govts responsibility to comfort the afflicted, and to afflict the comfortable - but in this case there are policy options that would comfort the afflicted, well improving things for most of the comfortable as well.
And the presence of other neighborhoods doesn't mean that development must remain static in neighborhoods that are higher value.
But again, even our "cheap" neighborhoods are still really expensive.
not this again. new high end housing in a neighborhood undergoing gentrification may make housing in that neighborhood more expensive, as the area becomes more desirable. But that will soak up demand from OTHER neighborhoods and hold down or reduce rents there. It hasn't happened in DC because the combination of institutional constraints (including NIMBYISM), other causes of lag, etc mean that supply has not caught up to demand.
In a building where rents are $3K and a certain number have to be available for Section 8, which is I guess about $1K, I'd assume the market rate tenants do pay higher. It's better to just say that's our desired policy and we accept the costs to other tenants than to sweep it under the rug.
Estimating the cost in each building also would allow us to objectively determine whether the amount of defacto private subsidy is better spent in that building or through allowing more units of off-site housing to be built by the builder.
Not taking a side, it would just be good to know.
This doesn't make sense. If unlimited density were allowed without low income units, why would developers take advantage of a bonus for building low income units?
The reality that exists is that we have decided how big developers can build, using zoning tools. We allow them to build a bit bigger if they include some low-income units. There is no "requirement" unless you want extra than what is allowed by right.
In a building where rents are $3K and a certain number have to be available for Section 8, which is I guess about $1K, I'd assume the market rate tenants do pay higher.
Perhaps this is true if you compare the building with low-income units to the exact same building without low-income units. But that second building isn't allowed to be built legally so there's no point in making that comparison.
1. Never say never. Places like 14th Street saw their fortunes decline from when they were first developed at some time. Long time horizons, I know, but far shorter than 'never.'
2. There is and will be fundamental neighborhood change, no doubt about that. However, we're not just talking about the dynamics of specific neighborhoods. We're also talking about the housing market as a whole, for the entire region.
Expensive housing does indeed soak up demand from other neighborhoods, because the demand is somewhat finite. Our supply is not even close to keeping pace with growing demand, however.
What the region may have a problem with, as noted previously by others, is not enough supply in high demand areas - that is, an inability to provide high value for the money people spend on housing. Only the highest income earners can comfortably live in highly valued areas, but for those people, it is affordable. There are thousands of other affordable housing units but they are not necessarily located in highly valued areas.
As to 14th Street NW -- Just before the major change of the Whole Foods was completed, my dear friend rented a one bedroom for $800/mt in the hood. 5-10 years before that many of the large houses in Logan Circle were either unoccuppied or very run down. I'm willing to wager that you will not see affordable housing in that neighborhood -- except were subsidized directly or indirectly -- in the next twenty or more years. That is more than a long time horizon, that is a generation.
I think our policy should be to improve basic services in underserved areas, especially where they have excess transit capacity. We shouldn't try to build even more housing in areas that are A. already expensive (places like Arlington and central D.C. are likely to remain so) and B. already straining with the number of people (let's not kid ourselves that certain portions of the Metro are jammed).
Of course I think we should try to maximize housing options in downtown D.C. but we shouldn't pretend like somehow this will appreciably change the availability of affordable housing.
Also gotta love this fallacy:
I'm willing to wager that you will not see affordable housing in that neighborhood
Therefore nothing can change that and I'm right that rents only go up!
Yes, those arguments are consistent. The market process works just fine. Units filter up to more attractive and expensive submarkets as demand increases.
Supply is not growing, however, to keep pace with that demand. This is due to all sorts of constraints on supply, most of which are regulatory.
Those market mechanisms work the same way whether supply is constrained or not - the only difference is the size of the deadweight loss.
I'm willing to wager that you will not see affordable housing in that neighborhood -- except were subsidized directly or indirectly -- in the next twenty or more years.
Well that all depends on a) what kind of policy changes we see (not just in DC or that 'hood, but in the region), and b) how you define 'affordable.'
I think the better argument is that we've made a community decision we want a certain amount of low-income housing in every neighborhood's new developments no matter how expensive (economic diversity).
So the market works fine for lower income people but not for "expensive submarkets"? I thought we where talking about affordable housing, not "I wish I could afford a two bedroom condo rather than a one bedroom condo on U street."
"so an immigrant family, with a job in NoVa, is supposed to move to a high crime area in EOTR DC, and accept a long commute" I had to move to a high crime area when I couldn't afford what I wanted in a low crime district. In fact, that's one of the reasons the neighborhood changed.
Does every expensive housing market mean the market isn't working well? Does the cost of luxury cars mean there aren't enough lower end models? Strange, all the cities like DC, Boston, NY, and London, while not perfect are usually the ones deemed to be "working". Didn't the market become much more affordable when the market crashed four years ago?
by Juanita de Talmas on Dec 19, 2012 2:49 pm • link • report
That's not what I said at all.
Let me try and re-phrase. Market mechanisms work, they happen right now. Supply and demand meet at a given quantity and price. This will happen whether the market is working efficiently or not.
My point is simple: constraints on supply mean that the market is not operating efficiently. Our current housing market is not efficient at all.
And the areas in NoVa they move to are far from crime free as well - but to suggest that families take housing thats not that cheap for its quality, far from their jobs AND accept both high crime and poor education -well you can ask them to do so, but I think its a sign that it would be better if housing were less costly.
"Does every expensive housing market mean the market isn't working well? Does the cost of luxury cars mean there aren't enough lower end models?"
We allow luxury cars to be built in the numbers the market dictates. If we limited by law the construction of all new cars, that would certainly raise the prices of used cars, top to bottom, and create an affordable car crisis.
" Strange, all the cities like DC, Boston, NY, and London, while not perfect are usually the ones deemed to be "working"."
Chicago, Philadelphia, and many other cities have lower costs of living and work.
"Didn't the market become much more affordable when the market crashed four years ago"
A. Compared to the prices in the early to mid 2000s - which were already a problem and B. Mostly in the farther suburbs, which present all kinds of sustainability and transportation cost issues
its not expensive housing vs housing for the poor. Its expensive housing vs slightly less - someone looking at new units, if the new units are not there, will look at five year old units - and on down the line. In NoVa there are agingapts being renovated for yuppies, decreasing the supply of affordable housing - if there were more new hirises, the demand for the renovated older buildings would be far less.
If you were looking to buy a house yes. Rent stayed high and even went higher as some people who could have bought instead went back to renting.
Plus in the most expensive areas of the DMV the dive wasn't very steep.
True, but it is necessary. Any discussion about affordability that doesn't start with the necessary (if not sufficient) bit of adding more supply isn't much of a solution.
The market builds to the high end, and leaves most moderate and lower income working households without options they can afford.
There's nothing that ensures the market will only build for the high end. The market will build for the middle if it is allowed to do so, and if the cost of construction isn't too high (or the approvals process too long).
We also need more supply so that the definition of 'affordable' changes. There's no inherent reason for market rate prices to be so expensive. Other cities with more efficient housing markets show what is possible - if the market-rate prices are lower (thanks to more efficient markets that can more freely add to the housing supply as demand warrants), then the market-rate rents will be affordable to a much larger portion of the population. This allows resources for below-market-rate housing to be focused on people who really need it.
Do you know what $800/month will rent you in a city like Atlanta? A large 1 bedroom unit in a nice (if not shiny and new) hi-rise with tons of amenities and surrounded by lots of shops, restaurants, parks and transit, in an area significantly safer than Logan Circle pre-Whole Foods.
I think the fact that this blog post is trying to allude to is that cost of living in DC is expensive in areas that don't provide a lot of livability value, and really, really expensive in areas that provide a lot of livability value - even though there are also lots of people with high incomes.
What I do agree with the author on is that we can provide our already-expensive housing more value by increasing housing stock in demand-rich areas. That way, housing may still be expensive, but at least it's worth it.
Not sure where you got this argument from, but I wasn't making it. However, it could happen - but it all depends on a) what kind of supply increases we're talking about, and b) what submarket of apartments you're expecting to see a decline in rents for.
AND many of those ads say the unit was renovated or has amenities that the people who can afford that would want.
Perfect evidence of filtering up: landlords are renovating their units to meet demand for high-rent apartments, as new supply is not fully capturing that demand because there is not enough of it.
$13,000/year for a one bedroom is not affordable for a two person family earning as much as $30,000/year. So what is your definition of "affordable"?
30% of gross income spent on housing is my definition. That's the HUD definition.
So, no - even if rents in Logan dropped that much, they might not be affordable for your hypothetical couple. But that's also not the point - the rent could very well be affordable in a downmarket apartment in an adjacent neighborhood.
The housing market does not limit itself just to Logan Circle.
It would take A LOT of supply to bring prices in an area like 14th street down significantly.
That's not to say that its not a good idea to provide what supply we can. Because what is built will help filter prices in other neighborhoods and such. That 30k couple still may not get to live there but it opens up an apartment or what that would have been occupied by someone else. Someone else posted a link about Filtering and how it applies to housing that's what we're talking about.
Also it may not bring down prices per se but it will slow the rate of rise.
how does adding to supply "build demand" at a regional level??
There is now a pattern here that whenever "affordable" is mentioned, here comes the "poor, low-income" talking points.
Since I actually live in the area some of you are suggesting people should move to if they want cheap housing, I'll offer this about the "affordable options." Right now, there are townhome condo's selling for 385k. However, if you qualify (make less than 80 or 85k) under their "affordable housing" program, the same home will cost around 320k.
For some, 380 is way to high to afford, especially if they live alone. But 320 just might be more manageable.
Is this an example of an "affordable housing" option or am I just making this up? And if so, what exactly does that have to do w/low-income and the poor...who couldn't afford either option?
In the last real estate cycle, the best development opportunities were in the exurbs. Places like Loudoun saw the fastest price appreciation and developers built as if this trend would last forever. So, that market got saturated right around the time demand shifted toward closer-in, walkable communities. As a result, prices stagnated or went down in the exurbs where there was excess supply and a stuffed pipeline. Prices went up rapidly in walkable areas where there was a lack of development and a minimal pipeline.
Developers are now playing catch up, trying to redirect the slow moving development process toward the new demand hotspots. It doesn't help that regulatory burdens and community opposition make development a slower process in walkable areas than in greenfield locations in the exurbs. So, we're seeing a slower response to a shift in market demand than usual.
In the long run, the private sector will catch up with demand and prices will reach a truer state of equilibrium. However, in the long run, we're all dead, so it makes sense to grease the wheels of change to get to that equilibrium quicker. Of course, the nature of markets is that they will likely overshoot and eventually we'll be talking about how there's way too much supply in urban walkable places and not enough somewhere else. Thus, a new cycle is born.
Yes, and cut the police department in half and hire recruits who failed the police exam at least two times. Double the number of positions in all other DC agencies and then hire only political supporters. Stop investing anything in public schools (aside from the aforesaid political jobs). Finally, tax the hell out of anyone above the poverty line. Then DC housing prices would come down for sure. Oh wait, we tried that -- it was called the Barry era.
"My point is simple: constraints on supply mean that the market is not operating efficiently. Our current housing market is not efficient at all."
I'm assuming by constraints you mean regulations such as zoning which dictate what can be built where and how large can it be, like height restrictions. Does this mean that only a city with no zoning has an efficiently operating market? That would mean that places like Houston are efficient markets while DC is incredibly inefficient. What if some of those very regulations (like form based codes)ensure the building of a lovely environment which spurrs the market along, while no zoning creates the opposite. Isn't the "free market" full of developers wanting to control their developments with regulations (HOA) to ensure their investments? Where's this clear line you're implying between efficiently running markets and not? I'm afraid it's not that simple.
No, of course not. Chicago is also a fairly efficient market - the price of new construction units is near the cost of building new units.
That would mean that places like Houston are efficient markets while DC is incredibly inefficient. What if some of those very regulations (like form based codes)ensure the building of a lovely environment which spurrs the market along, while no zoning creates the opposite.
Houston is indeed a pretty efficient market.
Of course, DC does not have form based codes. Houston is likewise not free of all regulation, just Euclidian form-based zoning.
Isn't the "free market" full of developers wanting to control their developments with regulations (HOA) to ensure their investments?
Sometimes, but not always. I don't see what that has to do with constraints on supply, either.
Where's this clear line you're implying between efficiently running markets and not? I'm afraid it's not that simple.
Of course it's not that simple, and I'm not sure why you get the impression that there's a clean line. Like all things, we have a spectrum. My explanation may be simplistic about the mechanisms, but I'm only attempting to describe the broad framework.
An efficient market allows supply to increase to meet demand; an inefficient one does not. And the increased cost and reduced quantity of housing we all bear is the deadweight loss.
Could you explain what exactly you mean by constraints on supply if not regulations like zoning?
In biology, there are constraints to growth everywhere, it's part of any ecology with out which an imbalance might proove catastrpohic. The strong adapt and the weak perish. Mind you I'm probably as much a free marketer as you and most here, but the constant bashing of regulations needs some refining.
As you acknowledge, it isn't simple, but that shouldn't stop you from elaborating on the mantra of breaking the height restrictions or complaining about historic preservation designations, especially on this site where people are sophisticated on these issues.
Also, if you acknowledge that developers love any regulations that make them richer and hate the ones that reduce their profits, then you must acknowledge that regulations are rules that make a free market run more smoothly, lest one predator get the upper hand consistently, and spoil the stew for everyone, including themselves in the long run.
"Isn't the "free market" full of developers wanting to control their developments with regulations (HOA) to ensure their investments?
Sometimes, but not always. I don't see what that has to do with constraints on supply, either."
Then let's say regulations are for those times when a developer isn't entirely thinking about the common good. And it has everything to do with supply becasue if a developer can reduce the supply when the demand is up, he can extract more profits. So what's good for the market at the supplier's end is bad for the user's end. It's nirvana that all players will be loving life. Infact, the other conundrum is would you rather be in a tight market where you could find work or a cheap market where there are no jobs. It's hard to separate the two.
You acknowledge it isn't simple, but then go on to say something simplistic like "An efficient market allows supply to increase to meet demand; an inefficient one does not. And the increased cost and reduced quantity of housing we all bear is the deadweight loss."
How does DC not "allow supply to increase to meet demand"? Most visitors would marvel at our skyline full of cranes. And to think one can develope a market that is free of inefficiency is not to understand how brilliantly inefficient humans can be. It reminds me of the modernist ideal of building as a machine for living, which dosen't account for the intangibles that define quality of life, no matter how inefficient something might seem on paper.
I'm a free marketer also, but like any good game, we need rules to ensure some modicum of fairness. Not every kid is large, and when the big kids throw an elbow to score a goal, that dosen't make for a good game, that's just shooting fish in a barrel.
Here's an article that makes your point exactly. I don't agree with it on many levels, but thought you'd enjoy it.
Of course I'm talking about zoning, I'm just rejecting the black/white corner you're trying to paint me in.
I've elaborated at length on the subject before, both here and at my own site.
Suffice it to say we know zoning and regulation constrains our supply. I'm in favor of loosening that constraint. I like Ryan Avent's approach that states we don't know where exactly we are on that spectrum, but looser regs (in terms of supply, e.g. density) are better and will allow the market to work more efficiently.
Also, if you acknowledge that developers love any regulations that make them richer and hate the ones that reduce their profits, then you must acknowledge that regulations are rules that make a free market run more smoothly, lest one predator get the upper hand consistently, and spoil the stew for everyone, including themselves in the long run.
Your mistake here is to think all developers think the same. Their attitudes vary a great deal, often depending on whether they have a foot in the door or not.
How does DC not "allow supply to increase to meet demand"? Most visitors would marvel at our skyline full of cranes.
Those visitors are asking the wrong question. The question is not "are there cranes, yes/no?," but "how many cranes would there be in a more efficient marketplace?"
And to think one can develope a market that is free of inefficiency is not to understand how brilliantly inefficient humans can be. It reminds me of the modernist ideal of building as a machine for living, which dosen't account for the intangibles that define quality of life, no matter how inefficient something might seem on paper.
You are moving the goalposts here - inefficiency in the sense of economics means something very specific. It does not mean the same thing as you've applied it here.
I'm a free marketer also, but like any good game, we need rules to ensure some modicum of fairness. Not every kid is large, and when the big kids throw an elbow to score a goal, that dosen't make for a good game, that's just shooting fish in a barrel.
I have no idea what you are getting at with this analogy.
Again, show me where I've called for the elimination of all regulation.
Likewise, I fail to see how restricting supply is 'fair.' It favors the haves - those that currently have the land - over the have-nots. That seems rather unfair, no?
I'm not trying to paint you anywhere beyond the words you've chosen to express yourself with. Rather than always repeating the black and white statement that...
""My point is simple: constraints on supply mean that the market is not operating efficiently. Our current housing market is not efficient at all."
The implication is clear. Anything that constricts efficiency isn't good, unless you add the gray shades from which we both agree life resides in. You don't call for the elimination of regulation, but when you say...
"I like Ryan Avent's approach that states we don't know where exactly we are on that spectrum, but looser regs (in terms of supply, e.g. density) are better and will allow the market to work more efficiently."
...the implication is clear. If looser regs are better, no regs are the best. If you acknowledge that some reg's are a necessary evil, then I'd say they aren't evil, if they protect us all from something truely evil. You end by saying that you fail to understand how restricting supply is 'fair'. Again, "loosend regulations" would still be unfair then becasue they defacto restrict some supply. Much like Warren Buffet assures us that higher imcome tax won't stop a trader from making money on a good deal, I don't think some regulations keep developers from making money where there's some to be made.
What drives me nuts is that you're accusing me of oversimplifying things (in a blog comments section, of all things) and then you write something like this.
Not all regs are created equal, because they don't regulate the same thing! I like form-based codes. Very little of our current zoning (generally speaking, not just in DC) deals with form, however. Most is focused on use. And the parts that do deal with form aren't dealt with well.
Much like Warren Buffet assures us that higher imcome tax won't stop a trader from making money on a good deal, I don't think some regulations keep developers from making money where there's some to be made.
Our current regulations absolutely do. Say you're a small-time developer in a market with decent but not overwhelming demand with a relatively small lot and you want to build some apartments. The zoning code requires you add parking spaces, which dramatically increases your cost. It prevents you from building - because you can't hit that target market. Perhaps your lot is too small to geometrically fit the required parking.
Maybe you'd rather build to the prevailing height in the area, but that would exceed the FAR you are allowed. Rezoning the parcel takes a lot of time and money before the ZC. All these things add cost, and that cost has to be passed on to the end user, or the developer won't build.
Now, if the demand increases such that you think you can charge higher rents, then your development pencils out on paper, even with those higher costs.
This isn't to say that costs shouldn't be passed on to the end user - what I am saying is that we need to be very understanding of exactly what those costs are and what we get out of it.
If you manage to quote this as 'all regulation is bad' I just might snap.
Regulation of what is built makes sense when A. whats built has externalities and B. Those externalities have a larger cost than the costs due to the zoning.
The classic types of urban zoning are on use - seperating industrial - commercial -residential - etc. And on density - floor area ratio restrictions. The former are justified because of the impacts of uses on each other - idnustrial and heavy commercial impacting negatively on residential mostly. Density is because of the impacts of high density residential on lower density areas - and the classic response is to A. Preserve existing neighborhood form in built up areas and to enable a mix of different neighborhoods in new areas.
On mix - despite a case that some kinds of residential, and some kinds of industrial mix well (the Jane Jacobs discussion of lower Manhattan, I guess) most of us are okay with seperation of industrial and residential by zoning. We have learned a great deal about the costs of over seperating commercial and residential. I would suggest its strongly the case that those uses are overly seperated in the USA today in general, in DC, and in DC's suburbs.
As for density, the maintenance of low density character in built up areas, often goes overboard - not allowing higher density in defined corridors along busier roads, ignoring existing dense buildings when looking at neighborhood charecte, etc. In the suburbs zoning of vacant land has often without logic - too little high density, and that not colocated with transit and employment.
Additionally there are zoning limits that impact placement of a house on a lot - thats the stuff that DPZ etc have critiqued.
Its quite possible to accept zoning in principle, while wanting zoning that is both freer, and more reflective of urbanist principles.
But I zoning is not the only form of supply limitation. There are process issues as well. And in many parts of the metro area inadequate transit or bike/ped provision, or streetscape/public space issues that needlessly limit the supply of WUPs (and the corrections do not necessarily have to be a massive construction of new rail facilities, which is probably not feasible) And, as many have pointed out, reducing crime and improving schools would probably make possible the building of dense WUPS at those metro stations that are not yet in the process of development - notably those EOTR and in PG county. I do not disagree with that approach, but dont think it can be the only one.
You're picking and choosing from Alex's words and then extrapolating out that Alex things "no regs" is the right solution. From the entirety of what Alex has said it is clear that he/she doesn't think that. So instead of actually addressing differing views on the question at hand, you choose to change the argument to he-said-she-said-what's-your-position.
For example, you are misinterpreting the following:
My point is simple: constraints on supply mean that the market is not operating efficiently. Our current housing market is not efficient at all.
"constraints on supply" does not mean "regulations," it means the fact that we are not able to build enough supply to meet the current demand.
It is clear from just looking at the DC housing market is that we are not building enough housing supply to meet demand. That is evident just from looking at how prices are going up, how older (but completely livable) buildings are being completely gutted and redone as new apartments, and so on. If we want to work on the affordability problem we must work to increase supply so that older stock can filter downmarket.
I thought "the market" is the ability to price things. A market "not operating efficiently" means that the price is not adjusted quickly enough. In DC housing clearly that is not true.
What I think is meant is that the SUPPLY is not responding to the market price signals quickly enough. This is not "market inefficiency."
If it can't respond quickly enough due to structural factors or distortions (like certain regs) then that pretty much is the definition of market inefficiency.
by AWalkerInTheCity on Dec 20, 2012 10:00 am • link • report
I would venture that probably, these comments are coming from the exact same people that complain about the city's traffic problem, since in a lot of the "affordable" exurbs, access to public transportation cannot always be described as convenient. Frequently, you need a car.
And that's ignoring the price premium to clean up the inevitable property crime, cost of additional transportation, and limited other services. You know, like decent school systems, which we all pay for over the long run.
No, the government is not "obligated" to provide a damn thing. At the same time, it's short sighted to insist on just exiling those that make under six figures - including a large portion of the city's service staff that us rich people rely on.
Please don't. It's like the republican democrat argument when repub's say regulations distort the market and dem's say they're necessary for fairness. Turns out they're both right, it's just a matter of degrees, which is the nuance your statements don't imply.
As for the regulations keeping out smaller players becasue it's one dollar to much, there are many small time developers getting into the game, one rowhouse at a time. In fact that's how almost all the big time developers got their start. The market sorts out which ones made smart decisions and which didn't, but the existing regulations never stopped any from getting into the game, so we'll have to disagree on that one.
"This isn't to say that costs (from regulations) shouldn't be passed on to the end user - what I am saying is that we need to be very understanding of exactly what those costs are and what we get out of it." If all developers have to pass on the costs, then how is that skewing the market place? I work for a small firm that has to swallow the latest lead paint regulations (for example). We whine about it, but we're not going to close shop much like a trader isn't going to get out of the stock market becasue the Capital Gains rate goes up a bit.
Knowing your position is as nuanced as mine then, I might refrase this statememt...
"My point is simple: constraints on supply mean that the market is not operating efficiently. Our current housing market is not efficient at all." ...to
"My point is simple: regulations ought to be eased in order to make the supply of housing better meet the market demand"
Then we'll just sit back and let the market work more efficiently, until the next housing bust.
Alex explained how regulations hurt exactly these kinds of smaller projects: zoning variances and public meetings cost more on a per-unit basis for smaller projects, making those projects less feasible.
Then we'll just sit back and let the market work more efficiently, until the next housing bust.
So we shouldn't increase the rate at which we add to the housing supply because we need to keep a bubble going? The bubble wasn't created by oversupply of housing, it was created by too much credit availability which generated the demand. The demand in DC is already here and it doesn't seem like it's created by a credit bubble, since credit is pretty hard to come by these days. Not sure what your point is other than fear-mongering.
My point is that the credit crunch is as much if not more responsible than the regulations in keeping small time developers out since the reg's affect everyone, but the credit crunch is holding back projects. Allthough I hear that's improving, just not fast enough for everyone.
Now, a lot of the houses we did build were built in the wrong place. But that's also a product of regulation. There is demand in places like DC, but it's a lot harder to get approval to do so here than it is in a greenfield exurb somewhere - and a lot of development just follows the path of least resistance.
The real bubble was in the prices for housing (and thus is the credit used to buy them), not the actual number of units.
Truer words never written.
I'd hate to think, however, that the "affordable" housing problem in the DC area is now about more exhaustive audits of potential loans, larger down payments that people can't afford, and a 1/4 of the population having damaged credit histories and renting.
I said "it was the easy money that led to the last housing bust" and you said, the bubble was caused from the credit used to buy the houses. Easy money=credit, ergo we agree!
You also bring up an interesting question about where the housing was built. You say regulation led to the ex-urb building boom, but there was also a shift in culture where people's additudes about city living has also changed for reasons well know.
Ultimatley, there would be more (urban) housing getting built if credit was loosened up, so shouldn't we also be calling for easier money while we call for loosening building regulations? I realize this might turn in to a circular argument, but my point isn't simple and either is the definition of what constitutes a market. That's why this constant call for raising the height limit is wrong headed.
There is an affordability problem looking at the RENTS (and transport costs) compared to incomes.
Ultimatley, there would be more (urban) housing getting built if credit was loosened up
Why would this be the case? Easy credit for homebuyers doesn't magically make it easier to build buildings in the city. It probably would lead to more conversion of existing units into higher-cost units (kick out low-income residents, gut and turn into condos).
That's why this constant call for raising the height limit is wrong headed.
You are the only person in this thread who has said anything about the height limit.
The reason I bring up the height limit is that Alex B, the person I've been speaking with mostly, defines that particular regulation as one of the principle reasons we have a housing supply issue.
I'm a GS-13, make a little under six figures, and have been looking at buying a place. However, I was just diagnosed with a degenerative neurological disorder. Lots of stuff that I had been looking at doesn't really make sense for me to buy anymore. I probably need to buy a condo in an accessible building with an elevator. It should be near transit, but probably should have parking, because I will likely be able to drive longer than I'll have stamina to take transit.
I certainly don't think the government owes me anything and I function just fine right now, so I shouldn't qualify for any programs for the disabled. However, I was kind of amazed to find how little there is to buy in DC for less than 600K that does not involve flights of stairs. I was really surprised actually at how little there was. There really is a shortage of accessible housing in general.
by Not Ready to Be Public With This Yet on Dec 20, 2012 7:21 pm • link • report
Party-walls and a small yard are acceptable to most people, if not desirable (many do not desire the upkeep of a large yard) Planners can contain "sprawl" (whatever that means) quite well enough within the bounds of mixed use townhouse level density. Look at Old Town, or Adams Morgan, mostly townhouses. But the key word is contain and mold the sprawl into strings of pearls, not eliminate. Distribute the villages, connect them with reasonable choices of transit (car, bus, bike etc) but make them villages.
However, in order to achieve a higher percentage of townhouse level density, there needs to be some give on the containment of development. Not a lot, just some. If the region is to expect 2 or 3 million more people over the next 20 years, and only 200K of them will be housed inside the beltway...well, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to realize that most of the new growth (perhaps 90%) will be in Loudoun, PWC, PG, Howard, Anne Arundel, etc counties.
Simply put you can not make housing affordable unless someone is subsidizing it.
1 The builder/developer wont take less; who in there right mind would if you could get more
2 Building more housing does not make rent cheaper; out of all the apartments built in the city within the past 5 years how many are below $1500 none.
@ stevek_fairfax
How do those people in those villages get to wherever they want to go. You will either end up building parkways, highways, trains or adding tons of buses.
Then you will continue sprawl some wont accept townhouses; I know many who flat out said that they would never live in a townhouse due to them not wanting neighbors and they would live 40, 50 or 60 miles away and drive then be in a crowded area.
You could do a lot for the residents of those areas directly: better policing, better education, better jobs programs.
1. Affordable housing is defined by HUD as about 30% of your annual income.
2. You're conflating two things. You're seeing the fact that new apartments are expensive and not being cheap. A. No one has said the new aptartments would be cheap (rather the existing apts become cheaper or don't rise as much). B. There are many confounding things that also have an effect on the supply of new housing and the price of said housing.
3. While some people won't accept a townhouse, many will based on the desire of companies to build them.
Add a Comment
- Consumers say they like trains. Why don't economists care?
- To bike without worrying about nearby cars, I'm happy on the MBT
- Alexandria has identified locations for its next 16 bikeshare stations
- Transit to Wolf Trap will still run through West Falls Church
- The Washington region is the world's 77th largest urban area
- Smarter growth will expand Prince George's tax base
- There's history to behold on some of DC's manhole covers


text:
... and your various aliases.
I know you're here somewhere reading this, so have a good day
... and your various aliases.
I know you're here somewhere reading this, so have a good day
WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
"People make me happy.. not places.. people"
"When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson
"Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn
#408. Sixty three not out forever.
Unban him for a day imo.
Happy Birthday Sir Alex
Direbirds FTW!
Creator of the Official Unofficial NZ Cricket World Cup Drinking Game
Round 2, 20th February 2015 - NZ vs. ENG
Probably my worst multi of all.
Nah look, this guy obviously has issues. Needs to get some serious help I reckon.
The Future of International Cricket - Rohit Sharma, Suresh Raina, Ravi Bopara, Tim Southee, Ross Taylor, Shahriar Nafees, Raqibul Hasan, Salman Butt, JP Duminy
Proud Supporter of the Bangladeshi Tigers
Ryan ten Doeschate - A Legend in the Making
MSN: firstname.lastname@example.com
Messages of goodwill flying in from across the Internetz
"Happy Birthday Precam"
"Happy Birthday Precam"
"Happy Birthday Precam"
"Happy Birthday Precam"
GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010Originally Posted by Irfan
Is Cam White, Is Good.
"What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)
R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best
R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi
Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath
"How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.
Who/what is Precam?
Forever 63* at the SCG
According to anagramgenius.com, 'precambrian' anagrams to 'Crap! Brain me.'
President of SKAS - Kat is King | Proud member of CVAAS - One of the best | LRPLTAS - Rosco rocks!
Go Tigers!
R.I.P. Fardin & Craig
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)


text:
- Follow the two hosts
- Follow the week's special co-host
- Grab the button, share it everywhere to spread the word Tweet
So link up all your social networks and have a wonderful Friday and weekend!
Hi Karen, just found you through the hop! I'm your newest follower and so can't wait to dig into your posts for fitness / health tips and inspiration. I'm really striving to get in shape and want to be healthy no matter how I may look on the outside!
ReplyDeleteHave fun cohosting!! Nice to meet ya! New follower from the hop. Love the title of your blog. I'm certain I will be back. :)
New follower! Found you thru Let Them Eat Cake's blog hop! Nice to 'meet' you! I'm glad to have found you because I'm determined to get back to my healthy lifestyle again so your blog should help!
ReplyDeleteStopping by from the Friday hop! Following via BlogLovin'. I am seeing recipes so I can't wait to look around. Thanks for co-hosting.
Hailey @ Love, Laughter and Lipstick
Congrats on your co-hosting honor! :) I'm already following you - have a great weekend and Happy New Year! :)
Ringing In the New Year
Hi Karen! I'm so glad you're co-hosting the hop this week!
Your blog is fun and full of wonderful tips. Keep up the good work!
I'm looking forward to following along :)
New follower from the blog hop! Love your blog & can't wait to get to know you more :) Have a great day!
Thanks for co-hosting, I'm new to the whole blogging world but having so much fun with it. Check out my blog sometime and have a fabulous new year!
The Real McCoy(s)
hi. i'm following the "aloha friday" blog hop. i would love for you to visit my blog and follow if you like it.
new follower bev
Hi Karen,
Thank you for co-hosting this blog hop. I am your newest follower.
Hi Karen!! I'm your newest GFC follower through the blog hop :) Hope you'll stop by and say hello!!
Happy New Year :)


text:
If you're not careful, getting in shape can cost quite a pretty penny. From the monthly cost of a gym membership, to very expensive home workout machines, to workout clothes, an MP3 player, a heart-rate monitor, costly shoes, very costly bicycles, health magazines and books, workout shakes and supplements, and more — physical fitness often isn't very cheap. However, you don't have to buy all that stuff, and if you'd like to get fit on a shoestring budget, it's very possible. Here's how.
Help promote The Bargainist — Digg this article!
1. Skip the gym. One of the biggest costs for many people is the cost of a gym membership. It's actually worth the cost, if it will motivate you to work out, but if you can motivate yourself to work out at home, or at a community pool, or on a track or trail, you don't need to pay the monthly gym fee. Cancel your membership and use one of the options below.
2. Cheap home equipment. What can you do at home instead of using gym equipment or expensive home workout machines? The possibilities are endless, but some favorites include getting a barbell or a couple of dumbells. With either of these, you can do a very complete, full-body workout. (Here's one example.) Or try jumping rope, or using a medicine ball, or a stability ball, or stretchable bands, or a chin-up bar that you can install in your doorway.
3. Walk. Walking is free. You don't even need fancy shoes (although you want comfortable shoes) or fancy workout clothes (again, find some comfortable clothes already in your wardrobe). Find a school track or a nice park, and you're all set up.
4. Run. Running can be expensive, actually, if you buy a lot of gadgets such as a heart rate monitor and other similar items. But really all you need is a good pair of shoes. Other than that, you can run anywhere, just about, and get a good workout.
5. Swim. If you have to pay to use a swimming pool, this isn't a frugal option. But you might live near a beach or a lake, where you can swim for free, or there might be a community pool near you for very cheap. And swimming is one of the best workouts there is.
6. Even cheaper home equipment. Don't have the cash for some dumbbells or medicine ball? Use stuff you already have. A stairway can give you a free step workout. Heavy cans can be weights. Your kid's swing set can be a chinup bar. Be creative. Or, alternatively, you probably know 10 people who have exercise equipment they're not using (it's extremely common) — ask them if they'd let you have them for free.
7. Sports. Play pickup basketball with some friends, or go outside and play soccer with your kids, or join a local league. The key is to get active.
8. Free fitness info. Instead of buying a bunch of books and picking up a magazine every time you go to the store, surf the web for some free exercise info. You can find a ton of useful info online: RunnersWorld.com or CoolRunning.com for runners, or try Zen Habit's health tip day, or Google "exercise" or "fitness" or some variant thereof, and you'll find a million free articles.
9. Cheap workout fuel. Instead of buying expensive workout supplements, you can just use what you normally have in the house. A great post-workout drink, for example, is chocolate milk: it has protein and carbs, which is really what you want. Other good sources of protein include egg whites, low-fat yogurt, soy protein, and nuts.
10. Bodyweight exercises and pliometrics. Another great free workout that doesn't require any equipment is bodyweight exercises: pushups, chair dips, crunches, Hindu squats, Hindu pushups, lunges, squats and many more. Also try pliometrics, where you use explosive exercises to improve athletic performance and burn tons of calories.
11. Use the stairs. If you work in a building, use the stairs every day instead of the elevator. Over the course of a month, you could burn a few pounds of calories.
12. Converse or contemplate. Instead of buying an MP3 player to keep your mind company while walking or running, try free alternatives: conversation with a partner or contemplation while you're alone. They're actually very calming and worth giving a try.
* Hot deals expire quickly. This deal may no longer be valid. |
I get a lot of my exercise through gardening. It's not exactly free, what with soil amendments (I garden organically) and seeds and whatnot, but it's cheaper than a gym membership and a lot more peaceful. This year, a friend offered to buy some of my surplus veggies, which ended up covering more than the costs of the garden. I would have shared them with her for free, but she insisted on paying me. I also walk a lot, particularly as I don't have a driver's license.
Try www.exercisetv.tv/workout-videos
4. Run
You need sneakers, and if you're a woman, don't forget the jogging bra!
Try out:
For some great ideas on body weight exercise and budget fitness ideas
Growing a garden is a great way to get exercise as well as reduce food costs.
Pets are also a great way to get exercise but can be a cost to maintain (well worth it though).
The business loans seem to be very useful for guys, which would like to ground their company. In fact, it is comfortable to get a college loan.
by guiyi3yg
The vibram five fingers are really a revolution in the world of footwear. They are exceptional and hold no comparison in the world.
wholesale nfl jerseys
The NBA players union and the boss finally alliance did not reach an agreement, the commissioner David stern but the announcement of the new season two weeks before the arrangement was forced to cancel.
[url=http://www.cheapjerseysfactory.com]nfl shirts cheap[/url]
Netflix and YouTube also have great free-ish fitness videos.
Add a little shine to the kitchen or bath with this 16 gallon simplehuman Bullet Open Trash Can from Staples. For a limited time, it's ringing up at $89.99 - for a total savings of 37% off. It offers a large capacity and open lid, making it easy to dispose of trash. Price is subject to change, order soon!
Stores: 20x200, 6pm, Amazon, Apple Store, American Eagle, Banana Republic, Best Buy
Sections: Automotive, Computers, Electronics
Tell your friends about The Bargainist!
Follow the Bargainist on Twitter!
Become a Fan of The Bargainist on Facebook!
Amazon items sorted by discount


text:
AgEcon Search >
Recent SubmissionsCONSUMER ACCEPTABILITY OF FROZEN MEAT MARKETING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS AND LOW-INCOME URBAN AREAS RETAIL MEAT SALES, MERCHANDISING, AND MARGINS: TWO SUPERMARKETS RSS Feeds |
Brought to you by the University of Minnesota Department of Applied Economics and the University of Minnesota Libraries with cooperation from the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association. All papers are in Acrobat (.pdf) format. Get Adobe Reader Powered by: |


text:
Farrington, Warren G., was born at Jacksonville, Ulysses, January 19, 1840, was educated in the public schools and follows farming. December 27, 1865, he married Charlotte Tichenor, of Trumansburgh, and they have had five children: W. Sherman, Edgar H., Clarence M., George L., and Leroy. W. Sherman married Nettie Crawford, of Ithaca, and they have two children, W. Russell and Ruth. Edgar H. married Anna Riddle, of Jacksonville, and they have a daughter, Hazel. Mr. Farrington father, William, was born in Dutchess county, November 15, 1807, and was a shoemaker in early life, later taking up farming, but returning to the boot and shoe trade again in Jacksonville. He married Catherine Kelley, formerly of New Jersey, and came to this county in 1832. They had four children; George K., Warren G., Martha M., and Mary C. William died in 1892, and his wife in 1890. Mrs. Farrington's father, Sherman Tichenor, was a native of Dutchess county, who came to this region, where he married Amy Rudy, of Trumansburgh, by whom he had three daughters: Charlotte, Lucy, and Emma. Mr. Tichenor died in 1887, and his wife in 1880.
From: Landmarks of Tompkins County, New York Including a History of Cornell University Edited by: John H. Selkreg D. Mason & Co., Publishers Syracuse, N. Y. 1894
Privacy Policy for OnlineBiographies
Tompkins County, NY Biographies
Online Biographies
New York Histories
New York Biographies
Maine Histories
Pennsylvania Histories
Pennsylvania Biographies
For all your genealogy needs visit Linkpendium


text:
Credits & Info
- Uploaded
- Dec 7, 2007 | 3:31 PM EST
If you liked this, check these out!
Music Video Collab 2 by Assios
- Movie
- Rated T
- 16,375 Views
The Music Video Collab by Assios
- Movie
- Rated T
- 11,364 Views
Creation. by Assios
- Movie
- Rated E
- 4,381 Views
ClockFight! by Assios
- Movie
- Rated T
- 3,056 Views
The One Layer Collab by MarcyVF
- Movie
- Rated T
- 49,648 Views
'Til Everyone Is Singing by IgnitionInc
- Movie
- Rated E
- 4,206 Views
Author Comments
The Music Video Collection. A medley which contains seven different music-video-parts:
1. Weird Al Yankovic - Don't Download This Song
2. Pokemon Theme
3. Eiffel 65 - I'm Blue (da ba dee)
4. Pet Shop Boys - Go West
5. Israel Kamakawiwo'ole - Somewhere Over The Rainbow
6. Weird Al Yankovic - The Night Santa Went Crazy
7. R. Kelly - I Believe I Can Fly
Please vote and review fair. I will respond to every reviews! :)
And PLEASE add to the Music Video Collection :D
- GlowingMonkey
Enjoy the movie!
Rated 4.5 / 5 stars
I Enjoyed This
I just happen to have seen your Music Video Collab before hand and I have to say, This is an exellent one-man attempt. (Btw, I know MVC was realesed after this). You can see how your experience on this has melted onto your later work, it's really quite astonishing! Keep up the good work!
Thanks for reviewing;)
Rated 4.5 / 5 stars
This was actually pretty good for a one person collab
You had me laughing all the way
Hehe, thanks :)
Rated 3 / 5 stars
Decent work
The lipsynching was fine, in my opinion, but a few things got on my nerves. Firstly, the looping of a lot of things were off (like the building lights) and the motion tweening. Too much of it. Such as:
The ground the guy walks on for the WHOLE of "Go West" and "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" (yes, emphasis on the whole, since I thought you were going to do that for all the rest, which you fortunately didn't).
In addition, when things were stretched, it wasn't... awesome to look at. Like the pikachu, for example. He wasn't just drawn thin, he was quite obviously squashed. If necessary, just make him "normal" then obscure the pokeball a bit. It's worth covering it.
But overall, it was a pretty nice piece. Looking forward to future ones!
Thanks for your review! :D
Rated 3 / 5 stars
Half & Half
This was a good concept, I liked the many different skits. The only thing that bothered me about this short was the sloppy art and the choppy animation, although I can tell you tried which is a good plus. It's not so bad, I just think you lack 'patience' when it comes to quality.
:Review Request Club:
Thanks. Yes, you're right that I lack patience ;)
Rated 3.5 / 5 stars
It was ok, good idea, kinda held back by your draw/animation skills.
The graphics were ok, quite simple, and the earlier songs were quite simple just tweens, so you definitely need to work on that.
The sound was good, really liked the whole selection. I Believe I Can Fly was definitely my favourite.
Overall the content was good, you need to work on the menu, would've liked to see something a little more shiny. And work on the drawing, but other than that
it was quite good.
=Review Request Club=
Thanks, I know that I used too much tweens on the animations in that movie, I'll try to use more fbf now. Thanks for your review :)


text:
Magalhaes, Joao and Rüger, Stefan
URL: | http://www.igi-global.com/Bookstore/Chapter.aspx?T... |
Google Scholar: | Look up in Google Scholar |
Most of the research in multimedia retrieval applications has focused on retrieval by content or retrieval by example. Since the classical review by Smeulders, Worring, Santini, Gupta, and Jain (2000) a new interest has grown immensely in the multimedia information retrieval community: retrieval by semantics. This exciting new research area arises as a combination of multimedia understanding, information extraction, information retrieval and digital libraries. This chapter presents a comprehensive review of analysis algorithms to extract semantic information from multimedia content. We discuss statistical approaches to analyse images and video content and conclude with a discussion regarding the described methods.
Item Type: | Book Chapter |
Keywords: | semantic-multimedia analysis; semantic annotation; statistical models; review |
Academic Unit/Department: | Knowledge Media Institute |
Item ID: | 22053 |
Depositing User: | Stefan Rüger |
Date Deposited: | 14 Jul 2010 10:04 |
Last Modified: | 22 Oct 2012 10:49 |
URI: | http://oro.open.ac.uk/id/eprint/22053 |
Share this page: |


text:
Australia, N.Z. Dollars Fall Before Chinese Manufacturing Data
The Australian and New Zealand dollars weakened against their U.S. peer as risk appetite fell before a private report that's forecast to show Chinese manufacturing is strengthening.
The Aussie dollar declined versus the majority of its most- traded counterparts as U.S. stocks dropped amid concern a budget standoff will push the world's biggest economy into recession. The New Zealand dollar, nicknamed the kiwi, fell versus the greenback as commodities declined. A Bloomberg survey forecast a report will show China's purchasing managers' index rose to 50.8 in December from 50.5 the prior month. A reading above 50 indicates expansion. China is Australia's biggest trading partner and New Zealand's second-largest export market.
"A near-term agreement on the U.S. fiscal cliff is becoming increasingly unlikely, in our view, and continued political deadlock is likely to have a negative impact on financial-market confidence and risk-sensitive assets, including the Australian dollar," Jose Wynne, head of North America foreign-exchange research for Barclays Plc's investment banking unit in New York, wrote yesterday in a note to clients.
Australia's currency depreciated 0.3 percent to $1.0528 yesterday in New York, after earlier falling 0.5 percent, its biggest intraday drop since Nov. 29. It rose 0.2 percent to 88.06 yen.
The kiwi declined 0.1 percent to 84.33 U.S. cents. It climbed 0.4 percent to 70.53 yen and touched 70.67 yen, its highest level since October 2008.
U.S. Showdown
The Standard & Poor's 500 Index fell as much as 0.9 percent as U.S. lawmakers from both political parties expressed renewed pessimism about the prospects for resolving a budget showdown before more than $600 billion automatic in tax increases and spending cuts start taking effect in January. The Congressional Budget Office has said that if nothing changes, the stalemate probably would lead to a recession.
S&P's GSCI Index of raw materials fell 0.9 percent.
New Zealand's dollar has strengthened 6.4 percent this year, the biggest increase among the 10 developed-nation currencies monitored by the Bloomberg Correlation-Weighted Indexes. The Aussie has gained 0.6 percent, and the U.S. dollar has fallen 2.8 percent.
To contact the reporter on this story: Joseph Ciolli in New York at firstname.lastname@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Dave Liedtka at email@example.com


text:
Kallenbach, Hermann, 1871-1945
From Library of Congress Name Authority File
Kallenbach, Hermann, 1871-1945
Instance Of
Scheme Membership(s)
Collection Membership(s)
Exact Matching Concepts from Other Schemes
- found: Hermann Kallenbach, 1997: t.p. (Hermann Kallenbach) pref. (1871-1945; German-born Jewish architect; settled in South Africa; friend of Mahatma Gandhi) p. 10 (b. Neustadt, East Prussia, Mar. 1, 1871)
Change Notes
- 1998-12-02: new
Alternate Formats


text:
From: | Matthias Schmidt <matthias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Fri, 7 Aug 2009 12:41:45 +0200 |
Moin, is anybody of you going to HAR 2009 in the Netherlands next week? See http://www.har2009.org if you do not know what HAR is. I'll be definitely there and we could schedule a DragonFly BSD meeting. Just drop me a private mail if you'd like to come. Cheers Matthias


text:
- Filed Under
Nearly 100 kids and families counted down to the new year Tuesday at the second-annual New Year's Eve Family Bash at the Coralville Center for the Performing Arts. Kids got crafty with beads and costumes, danced to a live performance from local Irish folk band the Beggarmen, and toasted 2014 with sparkling juice and a balloon drop.
Lynette Hamilton of Coralville said she attended the New Year's Eve Family Bash to celebrate the holiday in a family friendly environment.
"It's something to do on New Year's Eve, and it's a really good thing for the kids," Hamilton said. ...


text:
Alannah Myles: astrology, horoscope, natal chart |
Born: | December 25, 1958, 12:00 PM (unknown) | |||
In: | Toronto, Ontario (Canada) | |||
Sun: | 3°25' Capricorn | |||
Moon: | 28°08' Gemini | |||
Dominants: | Capricorn, Sagittarius, Gemini Saturn, Sun, Mars Earth, Fire / Mutable | |||
Chinese Astrology: | Earth Dog | |||
Numerology: | Birthpath 6 | |||
Popularity: | 3,721 clicks, 8,617th woman, 26,912th celebrity |
Alannah Myles (born December 25, 1958, Toronto, Ontario) is a Canadian singer-songwriter, the daughter of Canadian broadcast pioneer William Douglas Byles. In 1989, she released her eponymous debut album. In 1990, "Black Velvet", a single from that album, was a worldwide hit and won a Grammy Award for Best Rock Vocal Performance, Female. Biography Alannah began writing songs at the age of 9. She performed in a songwriting group for the Kiwanis Music Festival in Toronto at 12 years of age and by the time she was a teenager, began performing solo gigs in Southern Ontario. She eventually met Christopher Ward, a WMG recording artist and songwriter who helped her to form her own band, and performed cover versions of T. Rex, AC/DC, Bob Seger, Ann Peebles, the Rolling Stones, and the Preten...
If you happen to know the time of birth of Alannah Myles, we would appreciate it very much if you would send us your information including your source, if any. We thank you in advance for contributing to the enhancement of our astrological database. As a token of our gratefulness, we shall be glad to send you for free the astrological portrait (32-36 pages) of this celebrity, if you let us know that you are interested in it.
Celebrities born the same day: Helena Christensen, Carlos Castaneda, Ingrid Betancourt, Humphrey Bogart, Annie Lennox, Dido (singer), Carole Rousseau, Tuomas Holopainen, Sissy Spacek, Louise Bourgeois, Olivier Sitruk, Noël Mamère, Jillie Mack, Anwar Sadat, Helena Rubinstein... List of all the celebrities born on December 25.
To add this celebrity to your favourites, please register as a member. It is free and quickly done. Then, you can use all the applications reserved for members only, and you can receive your free personalized horoscope by email.
To get your compatibility ratings with this celebrity, please register as a member. It is free and quickly done. Then, you can use all the applications reserved for members only, and you can receive your free personalized horoscope by email.


text:
Chattanooga Allergy Clinic
0  Reviews
Chattanooga, TN 37421 Claim Your Listing
State of the art testing, treatment and education for adults and children with: Asthma, Respiratory Allergy, Hay Fever, Sinus Disease, Latex Allergy, Food Allergy, Eczema & Hives, Immunologic Disease, Insect Sting Allergy, Anaphylaxis. Additional Locations: Hixson Office 1005 Executive Drive Suite 101 Hixson, TN 37343 Cleveland Office 2960 Westside Drive SW Cleveland, TN 37312 Fort Oglethorpe Office 101 Creye-Leike Drive Fort Oglethorpe, GA 30742 Erlanger @ Volkswagen Drive 2380 Volkswagen Drive Chattanooga, TN 37416
Phone Numbers
- main:
(423) 899-0431
- Physician Office
1.9 Miles
414 Mccallie Ave, Chattanooga, TN 37402
"I have always heard if you need a lawyer, hire one who specializes in what your need is. Bu...">
3.8 Miles
4330 Ringgold Rd, East Ridge, TN 37412
"Decent hair cut for guys at a decent price. Just walked in & didn't have to wait but about ...">
0.7 Miles
725 Glenwood Dr Ste E690, Chattanooga, TN 37404
"Dr. Collins has a way of putting you at ease especially before undergoing a procedure. He i...">