MoCo Council Vote Today

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suppose our personal finance math may differ, but two married people making a combined 140 a yr or so, I wouldnt feel comfortable with a 700k house. (thats on the low end by the way, the ones in Arlington ended up over 1M). But lets assume 700k here. You would need 140 for a down payment for an 80/20 mortgage.

Then you factor in property taxes, insurance, etc etc... no effing way two teachers or two nurses are swinging that.

Again-its a fairy tale story "we want affordable houses for teachers and nurses and cops!!" (then they build 700-1M triplexes, that none of those people will actually buy or be able to afford).

Just admit that.

New construction is always going to demand a premium. The issue isn't so much what the new units will cost, but what effect they will have on other units compared to maintaining the status quo.

Scarcity drives prices. More people competing for the same number of homes is going to keep driving prices up faster than incomes.

I would be inclined to agree somewhat with this theory (full on admitting by the way that the new constuction isnt actually for the famed "teachers, firefighters, cops, nurses" trope mind you), but the wealthier will buy them and free up some of the older, cheaper, inventory... EXCEPT.... no one is leaving a 2.5-3.5% mortgage for a 6.5. It's jsut not happening.

So the new builds will need to be price attainable for the actual middle class you are claiming to help.

Change happens slowly. There's no quick fix here. Certainly this proposal isn't a big enough to do much on its own-- it only applies to about 2500 lots in the county. But we need to be making changes get us to a better place in 20 years.

To deal with the immediate problem, there isn't much we can do other than subsidize housing for low-income workers. And we're never going to be able to fund that sustainably at the necessary levels.

Is the proportion of "naturally occuring affordable housing" in those 2500 lots greater than that elsewhere in the targeted neighborhoods? Yes? Oops...

One of two things will happen in those areas.

1) We allow or perhaps even incentive moderate density redevelopment, likely resulting in the cheapest properties being redeveloped first. The redeveloped properties will almost certainly be more expensive than the homes they replace, but we know over time things like townhomes are cheaper than surrounding single family homes.

2) We maintain SFH-only zoning in those areas. Over time, those homes will be remodeled, expanded, or rebuilt, significantly increasing their values and costs.

Which one ultimately results in more affordable housing for more people?

False choice, there. Option 3 mentioned earlier. Greenfield development and very close to Metro high density provides for new housing, leaving the naturally occuring affordable SFHs where they are. All three contribute more affordable housing for more people.

How do you intend to prevent the close-in homes from being remodeled into expensive homes? And how do you make high-rise apartments and condos "very close" to metro affordable given that's an awfully limited with significant development already.

The greenfield development you want would be neither affordable nor in the same region as the in-demand areas of the county. And has no real hope of transportation infrastructure connecting it to job centers, given how much people fight roads, rail, and buses.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

The "I got mine" attitude in this is striking.

The "we'll take yours" of those pushing this is even more striking.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

You people keep yapping about "infrastructure". You do realize we know how to build things in this country, right?

Jesus, get over it. More sewer/power/dog catchers are possible, stop worrying about tit.

Or...now follow, here...or, they could actually require the infrastructure be coincident with the development.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

The "I got mine" attitude in this is striking.

The "we'll take yours" of those pushing this is even more striking.

The zoning changes wouldn't involve taking land. But your sprawl proposal would require taking homes via eminent domain to build all the roads into DC it would need.

And surely you wouldn't fight a new 6 lane highway going in next to your house.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

You people keep yapping about "infrastructure". You do realize we know how to build things in this country, right?

Jesus, get over it. More sewer/power/dog catchers are possible, stop worrying about tit.

Or...now follow, here...or, they could actually require the infrastructure be coincident with the development.

Oh, you’ll strike a nerve here. They hate any preposterous talk of planning for growth. They just want to, like, let the growth happen, man. The schools will totally just get planned organically!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

You people keep yapping about "infrastructure". You do realize we know how to build things in this country, right?

Jesus, get over it. More sewer/power/dog catchers are possible, stop worrying about tit.

Or...now follow, here...or, they could actually require the infrastructure be coincident with the development.

Oh, you’ll strike a nerve here. They hate any preposterous talk of planning for growth. They just want to, like, let the growth happen, man. The schools will totally just get planned organically!

YIMBY are the left-wing version of trickle-down-economics. No evidence to support their claims that eliminating zoning will magically solve all of societies issues, but they fervently believe that allowing the wealthy developers to do whatever they want without contributing to funding infrastructure will benefit society. Free-markets don't work for public safety, they don't work for schools, healthcare, or infrastructure planning. Eliminating zoning is just an another form of crony capitalism that benefits the ultra-wealthy mostly at the expense of normal people.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone wants to understand why this country doesn't build ANYTHING any more (high speed rail, infrastructure, clean energy, new cities) you just have to listen to these NIMBYs.

Just so disappointing to see a bunch of old people hold the country hostage while more and more people struggle. Typical boomers.

THERE IS A TON OF CHEAP LAND IN THE COUNTY...just not in Bethesda or Chevy Chase.

Plenty of middle class homes under 750k. People just think because they make 125k a year they are too good for them

The further away homes are from jobs, the more transportation infrastructure is needed. The NIMBY's in this country don't want to expand roads or public transportation, either.

By all means, go to meetings saying you want to expand into the ag reserve, build out light rail and bus, and widen Darnestown Rd, Georgia Ave, University Blvd, and Connecticut Ave. See how much support you get.

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know that upcounty residents, who YIMBYs often paint as being very NIMBY, want more roads. They really wanted M-83 but the YIMBYs on the council voted against it. On top of that, the YIMBYs have bled infrastructure funding with their tax breaks for developers.

The downcounty residents are the NIMBY's.. Look how hard they fight the purple line.

Case in point: The purple line is getting built. Another YIMBY win.

The purple line was tremendously delayed.

And look at M-83. Or the CCT. Or the Montrose Parkway extension.

There hasn't been any significant change in zoning to encourage increasing density at scale. This ZTA demonstrates that quite well. You're up in arms over a relatively small increase in density in only about 1% of the lots in the county.

None of this changes the fact that the YIMBYs have been on the winning side of every major land use vote at the council.

The only thing I’m up in arms about is YIMBYs’ refusal to take any responsibility for the state of the county’s economy and housing market. If you keep winning you actually have to fix things. Smart growth hasn’t fixed the housing market or the budget or economic growth or any of the other things that have been promised over the years. It’s made them worse.

The county hasn't pursued growth. Everything gets wrapped up in battles limiting what ultimately happens. So we just end up with bits of infill development where there happens to be land, some redevelopment of strip malls, and some sprawl mostly up 270.

Look at this case. We started with something that was already limited in scope and density, and then the proposal was watered down to the point that very few lots can take advantage of the changes.

I agree that the county hasn’t pursued growth. YIMBY policies have rewarded rent seekers, so the market seeks rents instead of growth.

I don't even believe there are YIMBY people who do not have a financial stake in the game. I know a few big real estate developers and they live in big custom homes in upper MoCo, Great Falls, Potomac or even in DC. They aren't sitting next to you at the BCC back to school night. They may own land/homes in your area, but that's for the full purpose of resell and development. It's a cover and a farce. They really do not care about the long term livability of a neighborhood. They have plan B & C.

Hmm, I'm a YIMBY homeowner. I guess I'm a shill because I want more neighbors to experience our great city?

You might come to regret your support for this one day when the MOCOs poorly thought out land use reforms result in a dispensary right next to your house.

"Let's build a small apartment building in a handful of areas"

"YOU ARE TuRnIn MY HoUse INTO A MetH LAB!!!!!"

"Let's keep the detached SFH zoning upon which residents relied when making their highly consequential and difficult from which to extricate life decisions. Incentivised increased construction rates and crowding present burdens to current residents, and infill at increased densities without adequate infrastructure presents burdens for new and old, alike. And it's not like we're compensating any of those in the 'handful of areas' who will bear the brunt."

"YOU ARE FEARMONGERING RACISTS WHO DON'T DESERVE ANY CONSIDERATION! WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, POOR NURSES AND TEACHERS??!!" (...whom this won't really help, but pay no attention to that!)

You people keep yapping about "infrastructure". You do realize we know how to build things in this country, right?

Jesus, get over it. More sewer/power/dog catchers are possible, stop worrying about tit.

Or...now follow, here...or, they could actually require the infrastructure be coincident with the development.

Oh, you’ll strike a nerve here. They hate any preposterous talk of planning for growth. They just want to, like, let the growth happen, man. The schools will totally just get planned organically!

YIMBY are the left-wing version of trickle-down-economics. No evidence to support their claims that eliminating zoning will magically solve all of societies issues, but they fervently believe that allowing the wealthy developers to do whatever they want without contributing to funding infrastructure will benefit society. Free-markets don't work for public safety, they don't work for schools, healthcare, or infrastructure planning. Eliminating zoning is just an another form of crony capitalism that benefits the ultra-wealthy mostly at the expense of normal people.

+1. YIMBYs socialize costs and privatize profit. YIMBY polices over the past 25 years have resulted in a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the super rich and from young people to old people while producing very slow growth.