Montgomery County zoning: Council wants to change zoning throughout the county to multi-family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you--I hadn't thought of the stormwater issues. Our yard and our neighbor's yard began flooding regularly when a neighboring house was torn down and a new larger house was built in its place reducing the grass and tree cover to the bare minimum allowed. The builder didn't care. We appealed to MoCo but they said since we were infinitesimally downhill from our neighbor that it wasn't their problem, even though our yard never flooded in 10 years prior. We each had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade our property and install additional drainage.

So your neighbor had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade their property so it wouldn't flood your yard?

That sounds like a good incentive for the homeowner to make sure that, if they build a free-standing ADU, it doesn't flood their neighbor's yard.

That's not how I read the post above. Looks like the homeowner and a neighbor had to pay thousands to add drainage to their own homes after another neighbor built a huge house that removed the existing grass cover and cut down trees. ADUs will impose costs on neighbors who reap none of the benefits of rental income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you--I hadn't thought of the stormwater issues. Our yard and our neighbor's yard began flooding regularly when a neighboring house was torn down and a new larger house was built in its place reducing the grass and tree cover to the bare minimum allowed. The builder didn't care. We appealed to MoCo but they said since we were infinitesimally downhill from our neighbor that it wasn't their problem, even though our yard never flooded in 10 years prior. We each had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade our property and install additional drainage.

So your neighbor had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade their property so it wouldn't flood your yard?

That sounds like a good incentive for the homeowner to make sure that, if they build a free-standing ADU, it doesn't flood their neighbor's yard.

DP

I read it that the PP had to pay so that her own property did not get flooded.

PP you're responding to. I read it that they both had to pay - the PP, and the neighbor who bought from the builder.

Actually, if I'd been the neighbor who bought from the builder, I might have consulted a lawyer about the builder's legal obligations to deal with the stormwater runoff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there’s no restrictions on the number of kids who can live in an ADU. Typical MoCo-the schools nearest to Metro and jobs, most of which are already way over capacity with no solution in sight, will suffer the increased enrollment from this plan which of course MoCo doesn’t bother to factor in.

I don't know about other areas, but most of the lots around Rockville metro aren't large enough to build ADUs in their backyard. And even if they were, a lot of the yards are slopey so it' s not that easy to build on, nor is it cheap. How many people around here would actually build an ADU? I might consider it for retirement, while I rent out the main house, but my backyard is about 5000sqft, narrow and long, and if I do build an ADU, most of the yard would be gone. I can't imagine building an ADU in my yard that would be big enough to be comfortable with the setback rules, and I wouldn't want the ADU to be too close to the main house. It would pretty tiny for two people, let alone for an adult with kids.

I live in a MoCO neighborhood with less that 1/4 acre lots for the most part and we already have some of these illegal apartments in our neighborhoods. People either build up or out and then rent out to too many people. You’ll be surprised at how many people will fit in a teeny area. Personally, I’m not a fan.

Like where? And if they are illegal, why don't you call the county/city on them?

I am not surprised by how many people can fit in a tiny area because when my family first immigrated here, all six of us lived in a tiny 1 br apartment for a few months, then moved onto a tiny 2 br apt, then a tiny 3 br SFH.

All over MoCo. Wheaton, Silver Spring, Twinbrook, Aspen Hill, Manor Woods, Randolph Rd area.

We do call the county on them. But the county has very little enforcement. It's impossible for the county to prove how many people live in a home.

Where do you live that this is NOT an issue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Too bad Merriam-Webster can't teach you logic or reading comprehension. I could plop a house down on a deserted island, but there wouldn't be basic infrastructure (i.e. schools and necessary vehicular options) to get to my job. Adding housing in isolation without upgrading public transport and school capacity is truly bad planning.

Schools are infrastructure. Transportation systems are infrastructure. Communications systems are infrastructure. Utilities are infrastructure. Hospitals are infrastructure. And housing is infrastructure.

Again, you seem to lack understanding of the issue. You can add additional housing infrastructure but if you fail to upgrade school capacity and public transportation options as MoCo has, you will end up with a place that few people find attractive to live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And Chevy Chase and Bethesda aren't DC. This is a poorly thought out proposal-we'll just have more traffic, more overcrowding in the popular schools that are already overcrowded, and pissed off neighbors selling because there's an ADU right on their property line because the Council hasn't given sufficient thought to all the old houses in this area with limited grandfathered setbacks.

That's ok with me.

In the big picture: The area population is growing. And people need a place to live. Where do you think the additional housing should go?

Keep in mind that you can't stop the area population from growing by not building housing.

You can ensure that basic infrastructure is in place. My kids are already in an overcapacity school, and it takes me 10 minutes to drive a stretch of Wisconsin that would take me 5 minutes to walk. I don't have an issue with higher density-I lived in New York most of my life, but Montgomery County has not shown any willingness or capacity to plan for the increased population of school aged children or drivers, and it's reducing the attractiveness of the area as a whole to a new generation.

No, you didn't answer the question. Where do you think the additional housing should go?

What's reducing the attractiveness of the area as a whole to a new generation is inability to afford to live here.

You didn't answer the question of why MoCo should be adding housing without ensuring basic infrastructure is in place. Why should they do that? Do you not think children deserve a good education? Housing can go many place--I lived in DC which has chosen to keep its low-rise character and not become New York despite being a much larger source of employment than MoCo. I don't understand your premise that MoCo needs to be the source of housing for the area--if there were better public transit (something MoCo is woefully lacking), people could enter far more easily. But I have colleagues who have turned down jobs in Bethesda because traffic is so bad, so adding housing without ensuring basic infrastructure is in place just reduces the area's competitiveness for skilled workers (but it makes the real estate agents and developers who donate to the Council happy[b]!)

THIS is what is key. And, this is where the money is. And, this is why this will pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Too bad Merriam-Webster can't teach you logic or reading comprehension. I could plop a house down on a deserted island, but there wouldn't be basic infrastructure (i.e. schools and necessary vehicular options) to get to my job. Adding housing in isolation without upgrading public transport and school capacity is truly bad planning.

Schools are infrastructure. Transportation systems are infrastructure. Communications systems are infrastructure. Utilities are infrastructure. Hospitals are infrastructure. And housing is infrastructure.

Again, you seem to lack understanding of the issue. You can add additional housing infrastructure but if you fail to upgrade school capacity and public transportation options as MoCo has, you will end up with a place that few people find attractive to live in.

If you don't add housing, you will end up with a place that few young people can afford to live in.

And actually that's the point we're getting to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you--I hadn't thought of the stormwater issues. Our yard and our neighbor's yard began flooding regularly when a neighboring house was torn down and a new larger house was built in its place reducing the grass and tree cover to the bare minimum allowed. The builder didn't care. We appealed to MoCo but they said since we were infinitesimally downhill from our neighbor that it wasn't their problem, even though our yard never flooded in 10 years prior. We each had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade our property and install additional drainage.

So your neighbor had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade their property so it wouldn't flood your yard?

That sounds like a good incentive for the homeowner to make sure that, if they build a free-standing ADU, it doesn't flood their neighbor's yard.

DP

I read it that the PP had to pay so that her own property did not get flooded.

PP you're responding to. I read it that they both had to pay - the PP, and the neighbor who bought from the builder.

Actually, if I'd been the neighbor who bought from the builder, I might have consulted a lawyer about the builder's legal obligations to deal with the stormwater runoff.

Nope, that was my post. I had to pay for additional drainage and re-grading. So did my neighbor. The new build owners/builder paid nothing. MoCo stormwater management did nothing. We did consult a lawyer, but since MoCo approved the stormwater management plan as appropriate, we had no recourse and opted not to bring action and suffer legal fees for an uncertain outcome, when MoCo planning tends to be on the side of the new builder (witness what they did when Ourisman Honda built on public land, they just gifted the property to them, because they had made a mistake in approving the plans.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the population has grown to such a level that our "inner suburbs" would be dense urban city in pretty much any other global city. The inner suburbs need to urbanize; we are running out of space and have a lot more people in the metro area. Similarly, DC needs to go denser and higher. I live in a SFH neighborhood in NW DC (R-40 zoning); its ridiculous that builders cannot convert any homes into multi-unit properties. And my elderly neighbors will fight them tooth and nail.

These things are starting to happen, but it will take time. The dying off of Boomers and elderly who bought their houses 30-50 years ago for a song will quicken the pace of upzoning. You're hamstringing two generations of young families that need a home and are spending 40-50%+ of their wages on housing. This isn't working.

Yes, the fundamental thinking is:

1. I've got mine
2. If you have enough money, you too can have what I've got
3. If you don't have enough money, too bad

My opinion is that this ADU proposal doesn't go anywhere near what we need, and yet here people are, acting as though this very, very, very minimal proposal were the end of all that's sacred.

Agreed, this proposal is simply a Band-Aid for a gushing wound.

Look at it this way: Bethesda is less than 7 miles from the White House. In any other global city, Bethesda would be chock-full of dense urban dwellings. 7 miles in Paris, London, or Tokyo gets you nowhere and you won't encounter any neighborhood with REQUIRED SFH zoning. The island of Manhattan is 13.4 miles long and you won't see SFHs REQUIRED by zoning.

It's ridiculous. Families need homes and the zoning in the DC metro areas makes housing prohibitively expensive.

If you're worried about over-crowded schools? More families mean we need to build more schools - let's pressure our local leaders to do so. WOTP DC is in dire need of more schools and soon; the school-age population is set to increase by 15-20% in the next 5 years. Bethesda also needs more schools. That's how you respond to needing more seats. For every old person that dies in my MIL's Bethesda neighborhood, either (1) a young family moves in to an expensive house that usually in dire need of repairs and updates or (2) it's sold to a flipper who then sells the house to a family. All these people want to put their kids in Bethesda schools. And yet I hear incessant whining from MoCO retirees who sent their kids to MoCo public schools.

Enough of the ridiculous "got mine" attitudes.

What's the point of comparing DC to Manhattan? Do you think Manhattan has more affordable housing? Simply making more high density housing won't lead to more affordable housing. Ask anyone who's rented in Manhattan. Forget about trying to buy.

And 'got mine' attitude? What does that even mean? I live in a MoCo neighborhood and my kids go to a Focus school. I certainly don't have much. But, I think this proposal sucks. And it will make my overcrowded neighborhood and schools even worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Too bad Merriam-Webster can't teach you logic or reading comprehension. I could plop a house down on a deserted island, but there wouldn't be basic infrastructure (i.e. schools and necessary vehicular options) to get to my job. Adding housing in isolation without upgrading public transport and school capacity is truly bad planning.

Schools are infrastructure. Transportation systems are infrastructure. Communications systems are infrastructure. Utilities are infrastructure. Hospitals are infrastructure. And housing is infrastructure.

Again, you seem to lack understanding of the issue. You can add additional housing infrastructure but if you fail to upgrade school capacity and public transportation options as MoCo has, you will end up with a place that few people find attractive to live in.

If you don't add housing, you will end up with a place that few young people can afford to live in.

And actually that's the point we're getting to.

I'm a young person who lives in MoCo and if MoCo doesn't add school capacity to accommodate the overcrowding, young people aren't going to want to settle there. This has been a long-running issue that MoCo has shown no appetite to address.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thank you--I hadn't thought of the stormwater issues. Our yard and our neighbor's yard began flooding regularly when a neighboring house was torn down and a new larger house was built in its place reducing the grass and tree cover to the bare minimum allowed. The builder didn't care. We appealed to MoCo but they said since we were infinitesimally downhill from our neighbor that it wasn't their problem, even though our yard never flooded in 10 years prior. We each had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade our property and install additional drainage.

So your neighbor had to pay thousands of dollars to regrade their property so it wouldn't flood your yard?

That sounds like a good incentive for the homeowner to make sure that, if they build a free-standing ADU, it doesn't flood their neighbor's yard.

DP

I read it that the PP had to pay so that her own property did not get flooded.

PP you're responding to. I read it that they both had to pay - the PP, and the neighbor who bought from the builder.

Actually, if I'd been the neighbor who bought from the builder, I might have consulted a lawyer about the builder's legal obligations to deal with the stormwater runoff.

Nope, that was my post. I had to pay for additional drainage and re-grading. So did my neighbor. The new build owners/builder paid nothing. MoCo stormwater management did nothing. We did consult a lawyer, but since MoCo approved the stormwater management plan as appropriate, we had no recourse and opted not to bring action and suffer legal fees for an uncertain outcome, when MoCo planning tends to be on the side of the new builder (witness what they did when Ourisman Honda built on public land, they just gifted the property to them, because they had made a mistake in approving the plans.)

My neighbor had a similar issue with a teardown turned McMansion--when you remove grass and trees and plunk a pre-fab ADU there, the stormwater has to go somewhere. So it goes to the neighbor's homes. Good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What's the point of comparing DC to Manhattan? Do you think Manhattan has more affordable housing? Simply making more high density housing won't lead to more affordable housing. Ask anyone who's rented in Manhattan. Forget about trying to buy.

And 'got mine' attitude? What does that even mean? I live in a MoCo neighborhood and my kids go to a Focus school. I certainly don't have much. But, I think this proposal sucks. And it will make my overcrowded neighborhood and schools even worse.

You're right.

This is what will lead to lower housing costs: more supply, relative to demand. You can achieve this by increasing supply, or reducing demand, or both.

What aspects of your neighborhood lead you to describe it as overcrowded?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Nope, that was my post. I had to pay for additional drainage and re-grading. So did my neighbor. The new build owners/builder paid nothing. MoCo stormwater management did nothing. We did consult a lawyer, but since MoCo approved the stormwater management plan as appropriate, we had no recourse and opted not to bring action and suffer legal fees for an uncertain outcome, when MoCo planning tends to be on the side of the new builder (witness what they did when Ourisman Honda built on public land, they just gifted the property to them, because they had made a mistake in approving the plans.)

My neighbor had a similar issue with a teardown turned McMansion--when you remove grass and trees and plunk a pre-fab ADU there, the stormwater has to go somewhere. So it goes to the neighbor's homes. Good luck with that.

OK, so we're back to the enforcement issue. The problem is that Montgomery County doesn't enforce requirements. The solution to that problem is to push Montgomery County to enforce requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there’s no restrictions on the number of kids who can live in an ADU. Typical MoCo-the schools nearest to Metro and jobs, most of which are already way over capacity with no solution in sight, will suffer the increased enrollment from this plan which of course MoCo doesn’t bother to factor in.

I don't know about other areas, but most of the lots around Rockville metro aren't large enough to build ADUs in their backyard. And even if they were, a lot of the yards are slopey so it' s not that easy to build on, nor is it cheap. How many people around here would actually build an ADU? I might consider it for retirement, while I rent out the main house, but my backyard is about 5000sqft, narrow and long, and if I do build an ADU, most of the yard would be gone. I can't imagine building an ADU in my yard that would be big enough to be comfortable with the setback rules, and I wouldn't want the ADU to be too close to the main house. It would pretty tiny for two people, let alone for an adult with kids.

I live in a MoCO neighborhood with less that 1/4 acre lots for the most part and we already have some of these illegal apartments in our neighborhoods. People either build up or out and then rent out to too many people. You’ll be surprised at how many people will fit in a teeny area. Personally, I’m not a fan.

Like where? And if they are illegal, why don't you call the county/city on them?

I am not surprised by how many people can fit in a tiny area because when my family first immigrated here, all six of us lived in a tiny 1 br apartment for a few months, then moved onto a tiny 2 br apt, then a tiny 3 br SFH.

All over MoCo. Wheaton, Silver Spring, Twinbrook, Aspen Hill, Manor Woods, Randolph Rd area.

We do call the county on them. But the county has very little enforcement. It's impossible for the county to prove how many people live in a home.

Where do you live that this is NOT an issue?

Rockville. Are these illegal ADUs or just over occupancy issues? I don't see lots of ADUs in Rockville. TB area lots are pretty small. I can't imagine building ADUs on those lots. Over occupancy is not the same issue as ADUs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Too bad Merriam-Webster can't teach you logic or reading comprehension. I could plop a house down on a deserted island, but there wouldn't be basic infrastructure (i.e. schools and necessary vehicular options) to get to my job. Adding housing in isolation without upgrading public transport and school capacity is truly bad planning.

Schools are infrastructure. Transportation systems are infrastructure. Communications systems are infrastructure. Utilities are infrastructure. Hospitals are infrastructure. And housing is infrastructure.

Again, you seem to lack understanding of the issue. You can add additional housing infrastructure but if you fail to upgrade school capacity and public transportation options as MoCo has, you will end up with a place that few people find attractive to live in.

If you don't add housing, you will end up with a place that few young people can afford to live in.

And actually that's the point we're getting to.

I'm a young person who lives in MoCo and if MoCo doesn't add school capacity to accommodate the overcrowding, young people aren't going to want to settle there. This has been a long-running issue that MoCo has shown no appetite to address.

How young?

Does Montgomery County need more school capacity? Yes, Montgomery County does.

Does Montgomery County need more housing? Yes, Montgomery County does.

It's not one or the other. It's both. Montgomery County needs both.

[Anonymous]

^ Also, for TB area, since it's in Rockville, Rockville City enforcement will definitely look at illegal ADUs. They came to our neighborhood when someone complained about an unkempt front yard and fences collapsing.