MOCO - County Wide Upzoning, Everywhere

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


Of course, anyone that isn’t a fool understands that there are a lot factors that have created the housing market.

However, we can play along. Explain to us the “Math 101” fundamental mathematical concepts that can explain the housing market or explain the impossibility of “faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.”

Not that anyone claimed that, I’m just hoping that we can all learn some masterful applied mathematics.


Any asset that can’t beat inflation over time isn’t worth much as an asset.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


There are assets that outpace inflation all of the time. In fact, one is…checks notes…housing, which has outpaced inflation in the U.S. since at least the 1960s.

They’ll teach you that in Econ 102. We’re glad freshman year went well for you, best of luck as a sophomore.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


Of course, anyone that isn’t a fool understands that there are a lot factors that have created the housing market.

However, we can play along. Explain to us the “Math 101” fundamental mathematical concepts that can explain the housing market or explain the impossibility of “faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.”

Not that anyone claimed that, I’m just hoping that we can all learn some masterful applied mathematics.


Land values can absolutely increase more than the inflation rate basically forever. As long as the economy is growing adjusted for inflation, finite resources can appreciate more than the inflation rate, but less than the real growth rate of the economy indefinitely. It does not mean that this will occur in reality, but it is certainly possible. Eg inflation rate is 3% growth rate of the economy is 5%. Land can appreciate at 4% forever. So land becomes more valuable after adjusting for inflation, but accounts for a smaller share of the economy over time.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.

I’m laughing that you don’t understand that nominal housing prices are useless. People buy their payment. We just had 3+ decades of a declining rate environment. Let’s check back in 2 years as the market adjusts to 7% mortgage rates.

You keep telling people to go to school but I don’t think you actually ever did or if you did you didn’t learn anything.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.

I’m laughing that you don’t understand that nominal housing prices are useless. People buy their payment. We just had 3+ decades of a declining rate environment. Let’s check back in 2 years as the market adjusts to 7% mortgage rates.

You keep telling people to go to school but I don’t think you actually ever did or if you did you didn’t learn anything.



Are you just bitter that you don’t own a home? Why on earth are you even trying to make this argument?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:People move to SFH neighborhoods specifically to have space. They are going to ruin the entire county until it is paved concrete jungle like Tokyo and we all get to live in sh!tty 400 sqft apts.

But hey, at least the crappy chipotle down the street is walkable. I can’t wait until this stupendously backfires and everyone with means (by and large part home owners) flees because all of the upzoning imports tons of poverty and trashy people into the county. Gee, you mean it sucks when your neighborhood street has 30000 cars parked all over because each triplex houses 20 people all with their own cars?

R.I.P. MoCo. Howard and AA Counties looking more attractive by the day.


Nah it’s Frederick that will benefit - and has largely benefited from Moco missteps.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.


Corrected link

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3p0aQI4pLoe36dJom7zzr9H3KxB5fzpImtEsLuBqd_K6pSBQ18P3DVaMg_aem_ZmFrZWR1bW15MTZieXRlcw
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.


This is from the growth and infrastructure policy. They’re proposing to cut these fees even though there’s no evidence that smaller houses generate fewer students and there’s no evidence that lower fees benefit consumers. The impact fee program used to be structured very fairly. Fees were based on the number of students a particular type of housing was expected to generate. Since the program started, they’ve layered a number of exemptions and discounts into it, hollowing out one of two dedicated funding sources for the MCPS capital budget. As a result, we’ve seen school construction projects downsized and delayed.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.


This is from the growth and infrastructure policy. They’re proposing to cut these fees even though there’s no evidence that smaller houses generate fewer students and there’s no evidence that lower fees benefit consumers. The impact fee program used to be structured very fairly. Fees were based on the number of students a particular type of housing was expected to generate. Since the program started, they’ve layered a number of exemptions and discounts into it, hollowing out one of two dedicated funding sources for the MCPS capital budget. As a result, we’ve seen school construction projects downsized and delayed.

Hans Riemer was responsible for messing up impact fees. He’s going to have left a lasting legacy of mismanagement in Moco.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


Of course, anyone that isn’t a fool understands that there are a lot factors that have created the housing market.

However, we can play along. Explain to us the “Math 101” fundamental mathematical concepts that can explain the housing market or explain the impossibility of “faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.”

Not that anyone claimed that, I’m just hoping that we can all learn some masterful applied mathematics.


Any asset that can’t beat inflation over time isn’t worth much as an asset.

The must PPP think that TIPS are mathematically impossible or some kind of evil trick that must be stopped, which makes me laugh so hard.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.


This is from the growth and infrastructure policy. They’re proposing to cut these fees even though there’s no evidence that smaller houses generate fewer students and there’s no evidence that lower fees benefit consumers. The impact fee program used to be structured very fairly. Fees were based on the number of students a particular type of housing was expected to generate. Since the program started, they’ve layered a number of exemptions and discounts into it, hollowing out one of two dedicated funding sources for the MCPS capital budget. As a result, we’ve seen school construction projects downsized and delayed.

Hans Riemer was responsible for messing up impact fees. He’s going to have left a lasting legacy of mismanagement in Moco.


Friedson too. He and Riemer are cut from the same cloth.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Blame the Builders Lobby/Association in your town.

They have run out of land to develop.


BS. The huge quantities of MoCo land that is underdeveloped. Turn the current commercial zoned areas into condos, apartments, etc. Developers would rather lobby to destroy SFH neighborhoods than develop the commercial properties. The land along the Pike is underutilized. It will never be office or retail space. Turn it into residential. The Pike has the infrastructure and Metro lines already there.


Listen to yourself. DESTROY SFH NEIGHBORHOODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 By allowing landowners to build duplexes.



Duplexes that will get turned into rentals. Ruin home ownership for the middle class and replace with rentals. Yay, we can all lay rent for the rest of our lives while building zero wealth. This is idiotic policy hidden under the guise of ‘improving affordable housing!’. It is nothing more than a land grab and stealing of wealth from the middle class.


Well, I guess you think renters are scary.



Renting sucks. Owning a home is the single biggest way the middle class is able to build wealth. But I bet you’re too financially stupid to understand this basic concept and are perfectly fine with ruining the last remaining pillar for the middle class. Yay, we will have your stupid socialist utopia when we are an entire nation of very mediocre renters for life beholden to corporations and investing group landlords who control all of the land and who can raise rents on a whim.


Are you a parody account?

Seriously, spend 1 minute on this. How in the world can housing be an unlimited source of wealth building? That wealth is only going up because housing prices go up, because NIMBYs stop housing production. Think about. Prices and home value don't go up unless more people want a more restricted good. Econ 101 champ.

Why do you hate renters so much? Why do you think certain people (owners) should get more wealth, where renters don't? Very selfish of you.


Owners should always get more wealth. They put up the capital and upkeep.

Renters get a place to live.

Why do business owners get wealthier versus a mid level manager?


If owners didn’t get more wealth than consumers there would be no incentive to invest and there would be no new housing. The left YIMBYs crack me up sometimes until I realize they’re making housing policy in this county.


Again, please explain how SFH owners can keep expecting faster-than-inflation property value growth, forever.

Please take Math 101 and get back to me when you realize that it's impossible.


I’m just curious: How did you decide that the previous poster said SFH owners need faster-than-inflation property value growth to come out ahead?


It's been the latest side-show to distract from their inability to address the concerns raised about additional densities, now pages back...


The distractions are endless.

By the way, speaking of pages back, did you know that not only are they not going to charge developers (or anyone else) increased impact fees for this mess, they plan to provide:

1. An exemption from the county’s development impact tax for three-bedroom and larger units in multi-family buildings.

2. A 50% discount on the development impact tax for single-family attached and detached dwellings that are 1,500 square feet or smaller (i.e., smaller homes, sometimes referred to as attainable housing)."

https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2024/06/01/how-montgomery-county-can-reinforce-the-goals.

3. Increasing exemptions for 3bdrm+ apartments and halving them for attainable size housing (not to mention a bunch of other changes). In addition, a revamping the public points system to minimize “excessive” additional requirements for residential construction.


This is from the growth and infrastructure policy. They’re proposing to cut these fees even though there’s no evidence that smaller houses generate fewer students and there’s no evidence that lower fees benefit consumers. The impact fee program used to be structured very fairly. Fees were based on the number of students a particular type of housing was expected to generate. Since the program started, they’ve layered a number of exemptions and discounts into it, hollowing out one of two dedicated funding sources for the MCPS capital budget. As a result, we’ve seen school construction projects downsized and delayed.

Hans Riemer was responsible for messing up impact fees. He’s going to have left a lasting legacy of mismanagement in Moco.


This is all sad. I can understand wanting to upzone SFH areas that are close to metro. It's only a matter of time before greater density comes. But to not charge developers appropriate impact fees just indicates that the MoCo powers that be are in the pocket of developers. And the crowded MCPS schools and crumbling infrastructure are a testament to that.
post reply Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Message Quick Reply
Go to: