This isn't West Hyattsville. I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but the mall is still there, and there are always thefts and crimes that happen there.

land near the metro is very valuable. if you owned the land, you, too, would probably want to increase density and charge higher rents. there are plenty of remaining rental units in this area at similar cost to the buildings that were demolished.

and nobody was "pushed out" of his or her home. the tenants' leases expired and were not renewed in the group of buildings that are being redeveloped. the residents were renters who had, by definition, a limited-term lease on the apartments. they were not the owners of the property.

hopefully less crime is more than a perception. i think we all would prefer a community with less crime, regardless of our income level.

Funny, I never read anything in the article that mentioned less crime. That perception is coming from you. And yes, with any demographic change there is a change in crime rates. Just ask D.C. residents.

Different owners. When you own the land, you can do what you want with it. There was talk about a West Hyattsville development. But like most developments in the planning stages, they got postponed indefinitely because of the economy.

i think your theory that the land near PG plaza is more valuable than the land near west hyattsville metro due to the existing retail and office infrastructure near PG plaza is definitely a major factor in the difference in developers' interest. there was, if you recall, a plan to totally redevelop the land around west hyattsville, but it fell apart due to the housing crash. perhaps west hyattsville will be developed eventually, but right now the critical mass is around PG plaza. in the future, when there is developer interest in west hyattsville, i'm sure the landowners will be happy to see increased density. the city/county can hopefully get the future developer to pay for the roadway and sidewalk improvements that ana notes are needed.

there are thousands of rentals comparably priced to the small number demolished on toledo road. besides those in the immediate area of PG plaza, there are plenty in other parts of hyattsville, langley park, riverdale park, and northeast DC. what there are few of, until recently, are modern rentals in the immediate area appealing to non-undergraduate, middle-class professionals who want easy access to metro and to UMD. developers are responding to this demand.

I agree, there are plenty of shabby rentals around for lower income people to move into. I'd say Hyattsville has done more than it's fare share of affordable housing for the last 2 decades, perhaps Bethesda can afford to take some of them in. What's truly shameful is concentrating all of the affordable housing in one area. I live in Hyattsville because it convenient to my job in DC, it has a ton of amenities and its affordable, but my least favorite thing about Hyattsville is the lack diversity in the population around the metro. We should be celebrating a brand new building and welcoming our new neighbors who can afford it. Thanks Mr. Spahn for working to make our community a better place!

"developers care more about the land and what money they can make, than the people they dispace"

it is really worth noting that developers are more interested in making money than in the personal lives of the people temporarily renting space from them?

i was not disagreeing that this developer, like all developers, is more interested in making money than in his renters' personal lives and long-term living situations. my comment was that this fact is so obvious and intuitive that it isn't even worth noting. as you point out, he admits it explicitly.

the developer has no obligation to keep all the run-down apartments as they are, so that his existing tenants can stay. instead, he is choosing to diversify some of this prime land to attract other demographics, as well.

This will continue to happen. Due to the D.C. area's relatively low unemployment and BRAC position, more middle to upper middle class people will continue to pour into the area. These people demand better quality standards and living. They also demand to live close to puplic transit systems. That demand raises the value and thus the cost of land in the area. To meet the demand and to maintain the cost, these new developments will cater to the new demographic demand. There's no consipracy to displace low-income people just for no reason. Market forces are pushing them out. The only other alternative like Danny mentioned is to keep the same old buildings and sprawl outward further into the outer suburbs where there is no current low-income infrastructure. But that's not smart growth. And smart growth is in. Suburban sprawl is out. Developers are working with what they already have in place.