Marc Elrich doesn’t think there “is demand for market housing.” He’s never going to fix our housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’d be happy to see alternative scenarios based on real data that show MF probably is the most profitable use of land in areas where SF demand is highest. But I’m not persuaded by your mythical $1 million acre of land and 8 $400k units. I’d consider buying one of those $400k units and renting it out at market rate because it would have a decent cap rate.

And if the zoning changes happen, you'll be able to.

But right now, there are no real data, because it's not allowed.

What’s your plan b when this doesn’t generate much new housing? Hope isn’t a strategy.

What's your plan b if it does? Crystal balls aren't a basis for good policy-making.

I hope it does. I'm in favor of more density but I think the outcomes Thrive advocates claim are unlikely based on the state of the market.

What is it like to be so certain your policy is the only way even when you lack to creativity/critical thinking skills to put together a forecast even remotely based in reality?

What are you talking about? Nobody is saying that it's duplexes or bust. There are multiple strategies, some market-based, some not.

That feeling when you realize you can't make a rational argument to support your duplex case so you try to change the subject. Thrive people are so tiresome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
DP but what are these multiple strategies? I’m still waiting for ground breaking at Westbard and the Strathmore metro.

https://montgomeryplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/PHED-Committee-Draft-Thrive-2050-for-11-16-21.pdf

See the housing chapter, which starts on p. 56.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP but what are these multiple strategies? I’m still waiting for ground breaking at Westbard and the Strathmore metro.

https://montgomeryplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/PHED-Committee-Draft-Thrive-2050-for-11-16-21.pdf

See the housing chapter, which starts on p. 56.

As the PP above says, its “tiresome” and nice attempt to change the subject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.

And the tens of millions of people living in one-unit detached houses with a yard, in a suburb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.[/quote

NO, there are the vast majority of MC families. Not a realtor here or even a real estate person. But do own a sfh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To me Thrive is not about builders, it is about how to make Bethesda, CCDM, or Potomac less expansive. If a multifamily building starts to appear on one street, very few new buyer would want to purchase any single family home on the same street. Eventually, this street will lose its MC/UMC residents. Street by street and block by block, Single family neighborhoods disappear from MoCo in close in area. At the same time, the schools will be crowded.
MoCo hasn’t been able to attract high-paying business, but is able to attract MC/UMC families, which have one or two parents working in DC or Nova, due to good reputation of its public schools. If the single family neighborhoods disappear and schools are less attractive, MoCo will lose its tax base. The real estate market in Bethesda, CCMD, Potomac, North Bethesda, or even Rockvill will go down. Finally, everything will be equal.
This is the goal of Thrive.

And who gets screwed here. Not the rich. They will move. MC residents get screwed. Invest their life savings in a sfh, that will not benefit from the traditional price appreciation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.

And the tens of millions of people living in one-unit detached houses with a yard, in a suburb.

Really? And here I thought the American dream was about opportunity and freedom, not specific kinds of real estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.

And the tens of millions of people living in one-unit detached houses with a yard, in a suburb.

Really? And here I thought the American dream was about opportunity and freedom, not specific kinds of real estate.

The American Dream, according to NIMBY morons, is having a single family home and being allowed to do whatever you want on your property, while simultaneously demanding a say in what your neighbors do with their property, because the American Dream only applies to the single specific vision they have in their own head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.

And the tens of millions of people living in one-unit detached houses with a yard, in a suburb.

Really? And here I thought the American dream was about opportunity and freedom, not specific kinds of real estate.

The American Dream, according to NIMBY morons, is having a single family home and being allowed to do whatever you want on your property, while simultaneously demanding a say in what your neighbors do with their property, because the American Dream only applies to the single specific vision they have in their own head.

BS!!!!!!!! Why are you so obsessed with changing the character of certain neighborhoods, when those residents do not want to change the character. You clearly need to get a life!!!! MC is big enough for all types of housing. There is plenty of space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

BS!!!!!!!! Why are you so obsessed with changing the character of certain neighborhoods, when those residents do not want to change the character. You clearly need to get a life!!!! MC is big enough for all types of housing. There is plenty of space.

Well, yeah, that's kind of the point of Thrive's recommended housing policies, isn't it? Lots of different types of housing, in lots of different places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you be happy. You eliminate what many consider to be the American dream of a sfh in a suburban community.

Generally, the people who define the American dream as owning a one-unit detached house with a yard, in a suburb, are Realtors.

And the tens of millions of people living in one-unit detached houses with a yard, in a suburb.

Really? And here I thought the American dream was about opportunity and freedom, not specific kinds of real estate.

The American Dream, according to NIMBY morons, is having a single family home and being allowed to do whatever you want on your property, while simultaneously demanding a say in what your neighbors do with their property, because the American Dream only applies to the single specific vision they have in their own head.

The American dream isn't a wasteland of concrete either.

Stop trying to turn the country into Japan where it is a sea of urbanism an asphalt for hundreds and hundreds of miles. We are not Japan. We are not Europe. Leave us the hell alone or get the hell out of the country and move to an area that you think is a utopia. Stop trying to crapify peoples' neighborhoods because you think you are going to get back at some historical bad guys.

We all know what is going to happen. Multi unit complexes get built in neighborhoods which house 8 adults per unit that all have cars that they'll all park on the street. The entire neighborhood is littered with cars everywhere, run down vehicles get left on neighborhood streets, and you reduced the QOL for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

BS!!!!!!!! Why are you so obsessed with changing the character of certain neighborhoods, when those residents do not want to change the character. You clearly need to get a life!!!! MC is big enough for all types of housing. There is plenty of space.

Well, yeah, that's kind of the point of Thrive's recommended housing policies, isn't it? Lots of different types of housing, in lots of different places.

FYI. I am not the one trying to change the character of sfh neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Thank you! Marcus Eldrich had been the best mayor MoCo has had in my lifetime. All the naysayers are just nimbys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


The American dream isn't a wasteland of concrete either.

Stop trying to turn the country into Japan where it is a sea of urbanism an asphalt for hundreds and hundreds of miles. We are not Japan. We are not Europe. Leave us the hell alone or get the hell out of the country and move to an area that you think is a utopia. Stop trying to crapify peoples' neighborhoods because you think you are going to get back at some historical bad guys.

We all know what is going to happen. Multi unit complexes get built in neighborhoods which house 8 adults per unit that all have cars that they'll all park on the street. The entire neighborhood is littered with cars everywhere, run down vehicles get left on neighborhood streets, and you reduced the QOL for everyone.

What did Japan do to you? About 70% of Japan's land area is forested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

BS!!!!!!!! Why are you so obsessed with changing the character of certain neighborhoods, when those residents do not want to change the character. You clearly need to get a life!!!! MC is big enough for all types of housing. There is plenty of space.

Well, yeah, that's kind of the point of Thrive's recommended housing policies, isn't it? Lots of different types of housing, in lots of different places.

No, Thrive will alter the character of SFH areas, reducing those the size of those areas.