MoCo seeking feedback on proposal to limit single family zoning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see a cafe in your picture tho.

How about western european style housing? Is that ok for you? We're going to Haussmann gentrify your 1960s wood-framed drywall hovel

Good luck:

https://www.euronews.com/business/2023/11/04/housing-crisis-are-you-prepared-to-wait-6-months-to-rent-a-studio-in-paris


Guess what, even with alllll of that style of housing they still have housing crises over there. France, Germany, etc….it doesn’t matter. The biggest difference though is that hardly anyone owns unlike in America. They’re at the mercy of landlords who can raise rents. MoCo council wants to gut the middle class and remove their ability to own and build equity. Their feeble minds can’t compute that some people can’t own SFH is and infinitely better scenario for the middle class compared to what they want to bring, which is NO ONE owns except corporate landlords.

Clearly what Paris needs is to replace those 6 story buildings with R-90 SFHs.

Quick, someone tell Georges-Eugène Haussmann and Emperor Napoleon III!

[Anonymous]

I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone from Chevy Chase doesn't hold up a photo of a 60-year-old Soviet apartment building they printed off of Reddit, at the next listening session, I'm going to be super disappointed.

Can we at least call a spade a spade?

Stop trying to deceive everyone by calling them 'multiplexes', they're kruschevkas, period. MoCo council wants to bring to the county what many communist countries have already done for decades. They want to get rid of American identity and SFHs and replace it with Russian/Chinese/North Korean/Eastern communist Euro style housing. Just be honest about the vision and intent. If the voters want Russian and Chinese style bloc housing, fine. But at least call it exactly what it is.

PLEASE go say exactly this at one of the listening session. And definitely include the spade reference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

What are the areas that are unaffected by this proposal?
I am in a beautiful area of Potomac where we live on 1.5-3 acre lots and our schools are already crowded as it is. I cannot imagine the traffic on river road going in to my job and what my kids schools would look like if we had apartment complexes everywhere!! Is my area exempt?
The truth is that we worked extremely hard for our way of life and we take good care of our neighborhood and we are deeply community minded people, and we don’t want to see it all ruined because the county has messed up the amount of people that let in and cannot handle the influx and strain!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are quite concerned about this initiative and the damage it could bring by being a blanket action that has many, many loose ends.
Our neighbors have come together and created this petition, which I am sharing here. If you are as concerned about this initiative, which we believe will only benefit developers and ignores the burden to communities and infrastructure, please consider signing:
https://www.change.org/p/protect-single-family-zoning-in-montgomery-county?utm_medium=custom_url&utm_source=share_petition&recruited_by_id=d45fc6a0-e495-11ed-9bef-8906207a502c

Specifically, our neighbors in Bethesda and Chevy Chase.

Yes, we are in Bethesda. As you will see in the petition, we are sharing broadly as we know it impacts all of the county.
That is why it notes:
“Please take a minute or two to spread the word to folks beyond the Westbrook listserv footprint. Here's an easy link for sharing:
https://www.change.org/ProtectSingleFamilyZoning”

As one of your neighbors in the Westbrook neighborhood, please stop advertising that you live here. If word gets out, our property values will surely plummet. It's bad enough we have to put up with your blathering and "the sky is falling" on the listserve. Get back to the important things, like complaining that a car is parked in front of your house or that MCPS rezoned an apartment building into Westbrook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

Wrong. You just live in an area where they had more lawyers to push for exclusiveness like city incorporation. Ha, as if Rockville, for example, is some kind of prestigious zip code. Yet they are able to exempt themselves from the S they're pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone from Chevy Chase doesn't hold up a photo of a 60-year-old Soviet apartment building they printed off of Reddit, at the next listening session, I'm going to be super disappointed.

Can we at least call a spade a spade?

Stop trying to deceive everyone by calling them 'multiplexes', they're kruschevkas, period. MoCo council wants to bring to the county what many communist countries have already done for decades. They want to get rid of American identity and SFHs and replace it with Russian/Chinese/North Korean/Eastern communist Euro style housing. Just be honest about the vision and intent. If the voters want Russian and Chinese style bloc housing, fine. But at least call it exactly what it is.

PLEASE go say exactly this at one of the listening session. And definitely include the spade reference.

What the hell are you blathering about? Everyone has always used the term to call a spade a spade to mean stop beating around the bush. It has been derived from ancient Greece and been used for millennia.

Oh let me guess, progressives have found yet another phrase they have deemed offensive because they're the overlords of our language and find offense where none exists. They also all tell us now that 'Latino' is offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Please go to a listening session and say exactly these words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ All owned by corporations and investors.”. - Yes.

The SFH is also an aspiration. In my view, the MoCo council is telling me all the work I put into moving my family into my SFH neighborhood is worthless. Because someone else cannot do it, what I achieved has no merit at all. And they will partner with developers to destroy our communities.

It’s the ultimate destruction of wealth under a flag of equity, which shows the incompetence and lack of qualification this local government has.

I am not affluent and worked to become a home owner. This is an investment for our family and what we are leaving our children or hoping to sustain us in old age. I am not asking the MoCo Council for a handout but rather to respect and uphold the freedom to build a future. This imposition in neighborhoods is disrespectful and begs the big question to be asked: Why are you disrupting instead of building true prosperity for MoCo. Are developers more important than your constituents? Why are you punishing homeowners that pay YOUR SALARY?

Boy, there sure is a lot of talk about "destruction of neighborhoods" here. When I think of destruction of neighborhoods, I think of the flooding in central Europe. I don't think of legalizing duplexes.

Your response is totally disingenuous. First, it’s up to four-unit buildings under this proposal. But even if it were duplexes, that increases the cars needed to park on the street, the demands on infrastructure, the number of students in already overcrowded schools - none of which developers have any care about and the county is already unable to adequately address these issues due to budget constraints. So quality of life goes way down, people leave, neighborhoods go downhill …. That is a reality.

But even the more fundamental issue: people buy SFHs deliberately - it’s a choice and a major investment.

There’s a reasonable expectation - or there has been - that zoning ensures that the fundamentals of the neighborhood are protected.

Would I have bought my home that I saved for for more than a decade if I knew tomorrow my street would be filled with quadplexes and parking and schools, already at capacity, would be even more taxed? No.

That the trees and quiet and small scale of my neighborhood would be destroyed? No.

I didn’t want to live in downtown - couldn’t have afforded it, either. And now developers and entitled YIMBYs want to gaslight me into thinking I’m the problem for taking issue with this proposal? No.

I guess it depends on what you consider "the fundamentals".

If the proposal goes through, will your street be filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow? No.
If your street were filled with four-unit buildings and parked cars tomorrow, would the neighborhood be destroyed? No, actually the contrary. More people would be living there.
Would four-unit buildings and parking turn your street into downtown? No.
Are you the problem? No, the housing shortage is the problem, or at least one of them.
If this proposal doesn't go through, will that stop your street from changing? No. There is nothing to stop someone from moving in next door to you, cutting down all the trees, parking 8 cars in the street, and having screaming arguments every night and parties every weekend.

We don’t want more people to come, that’s the point. We want our neighborhoods which we purchased into as SFH to remain as such.

Yes, it's clear that you don't want change. Change will happen anyway, though, no matter what the County Council does or doesn't do.

One point of disagreement: You purchased a house. You purchased a property. You did not purchase, or purchase into, a neighborhood.

Go back to your rental hole and stop being bitter other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home.

I am a NP, but I live in one of the wealthier neighborhoods that are unaffected by this proposal. According to your own thesis, you are just bitter that other people are more successful than you and worked harder than you to own a home in a neighborhood where these new proposals don't apply.

I don't think that way, mind you, but that appears to be your attitude. It is not a good look. You should try to be better.

Wrong. You just live in an area where they had more lawyers to push for exclusiveness like city incorporation. Ha, as if Rockville, for example, is some kind of prestigious zip code. Yet they are able to exempt themselves from the S they're pushing.

How foresightful of them to incorporate in 1860 to avoid being affected by county zoning changes in 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Please go to a listening session and say exactly these words.

Why, because the YImBYs are mean and vindictive little bullies that will doxx and harass people that disagree?

We know, we’ve learned it from affordable housing advocates that have had to live through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

+1000

The Soros-inspired liberal fringe is determined to destroy America. That's not what they say, of course. Judge them by their results.

Montgomery County used to have the best school system in the region and in the nation. That's gone. You can thank the "Progressives" for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it extremely rich the county rolls out the red carpet for massive amounts of undocumented migration and then complains later on about a 'housing crisis!'. Why exactly should American citizens upend our way of life and our housing we worked extremely hard to own because there are thousands upon thousands of affordable housing units that already exist but are gobbled up by undocumented migrants? You can't manufacture a crisis then demand our citizens ruin their way of life because foreign nationals are here illegally and consuming massive quantities of housing.

How about removing people here illegally first, then evaluating the housing stock once huge quantities are freed up for our actually citizens?

The county continually makes problems and comes up with solutions that make everything worse. Rinse and repeat until we are all equally in the gutter. I'm so glad we are moving at breakneck speed to be a county entirely of renters beholden to our corporate landlords. The only progress progressives are making is hitting the middle class and making us all slaves to landlords and investors.

Our population growth rate now is lower than when a 1960 suburb was built. If we absorbed that, we can absorb today. In fact, we should absorb more, for strategic and economic reasons.

Certainly, in a well planned manner in areas zoned for it.

For example, why are we wasting valuable time fighting about this ridiculous want for upzoning residential when the county could be zoning the Sears complex in White Oak for residential/commercial? Instead of finding a new anchor, they should bulldoze it and build.

Sure White Flint too, with bonus metro access.

This was an idyllic post-slavery rural county that greedy developers turned into little SFH enclaves (with racially restrictive covenants). And greedy developers will turn it into something else next.