APS: who is the best CB candidate on schools issues?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Boston area. Many of the surrounding/close-in cities with lax zoning are truly hideous—small lots, no green space or trees, covered by structures (quads, triples, duplexes), small driveways… No thanks !

I live in Lyon Village and the new SFHs have created small lots, no green space or trees (just enough yard for an It's Not Affordable and a Protect the Tree Canopy sign), impermeable hardscaping -- No thanks. Put at least two families in them or GTFO

Some of those large homes you complain about actually do house more than one family - multi-generations and/or siblings and their families.
All MM will do is create the same large (or even larger) structure that you loathe, while shrinking your street surface with more cars, more trash and recycling bins.

Builders already build to the max. MM won’t change that.

People keep saying this, but I don't think it's true. We built a house and could have built a larger structure based on the size of the lot. I think MM will be bigger than most new construction is now. It will absolutely always be max size. My guess is what's build now is 85-90% of max size.

Most new construction are builder spec houses. They build to the max. You are the exception.

And 90% of max is still huge.

Yes, but we are doing math here.

100% max > 90% of max

If your concern is large structures on residential lots, MM only makes the problem worse.

If your concern is affordability, MM also will not solve that.

If your concern is teachers having a place to live, MM will also not solve that.

If your concern is our racist history as a nation, I don't see how MM will solve that either.

So I don't see what it's supposed to solve. I see people arguing about climate change, but MM does not solve climate change either.

MM will make our schools more crowded and residential parking harder.

Yes to all the above. It won't solve anything, only create or exacerbate issues. It merely increases density. Period. Amen. It is a density plan and nothing else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Boston area. Many of the surrounding/close-in cities with lax zoning are truly hideous—small lots, no green space or trees, covered by structures (quads, triples, duplexes), small driveways… No thanks !

I live in Lyon Village and the new SFHs have created small lots, no green space or trees (just enough yard for an It's Not Affordable and a Protect the Tree Canopy sign), impermeable hardscaping -- No thanks. Put at least two families in them or GTFO

Some of those large homes you complain about actually do house more than one family - multi-generations and/or siblings and their families.
All MM will do is create the same large (or even larger) structure that you loathe, while shrinking your street surface with more cars, more trash and recycling bins.

Builders already build to the max. MM won’t change that.

People keep saying this, but I don't think it's true. We built a house and could have built a larger structure based on the size of the lot. I think MM will be bigger than most new construction is now. It will absolutely always be max size. My guess is what's build now is 85-90% of max size.

You are absolutely correct. People THINK all the new McMansions are built to the maximum allowed...they are not. The new builds will necessarily build to the max in order to fit in the # of units desired and/or the size of units desired. And don't be naive: the County will ABSOLUTELY grant waivers to height or setbacks in order to get 6 units instead of 4, or to "enable" the developer to provide the off-street parking without sacrificing units. AB. SO. LUTE. LY.

Tell me you have zero experience with BZA without telling you have zero experience with BZA.

Ha! yeah, right with you there.

[Anonymous]

PP from above about building new but not building to max. I had to look it up, but the footprint of what we built was 74% of the permissible size. We wanted a yard. We were also building for ourselves. MM will make it much harder for people like us, though, because market forces will drive toward developers who can afford to build to the max specs MM will allow. I would also guess more, smaller units will be more profitable, so that's what I would expect to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP from above about building new but not building to max. I had to look it up, but the footprint of what we built was 74% of the permissible size. We wanted a yard. We were also building for ourselves. MM will make it much harder for people like us, though, because market forces will drive toward developers who can afford to build to the max specs MM will allow. I would also guess more, smaller units will be more profitable, so that's what I would expect to see.

Maybe MM will inspire more people to put historic deed restrictions on their houses so there will be smaller houses with bigger yards available for people who are willing to make that tradeoff. That would be nice.

Or a few more people who can't afford $2M+ SFHs will get to live in Arlington, and that would be nice, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP from above about building new but not building to max. I had to look it up, but the footprint of what we built was 74% of the permissible size. We wanted a yard. We were also building for ourselves. MM will make it much harder for people like us, though, because market forces will drive toward developers who can afford to build to the max specs MM will allow. I would also guess more, smaller units will be more profitable, so that's what I would expect to see.

Maybe MM will inspire more people to put historic deed restrictions on their houses so there will be smaller houses with bigger yards available for people who are willing to make that tradeoff. That would be nice.

Or a few more people who can't afford $2M+ SFHs will get to live in Arlington, and that would be nice, too.

There are plenty of homes from under $2M, especially if you include townhomes