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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

they’re not doing it in a way that keeps up with the needs for basic infrastructure. There are about 40 overcapacity schools in MoCo and traffic is terrible and as a regular bus user, I can say that the MoCo bus system is far inferior to what I had in DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

they’re not doing it in a way that keeps up with the needs for basic infrastructure. There are about 40 overcapacity schools in MoCo and traffic is terrible and as a regular bus user, I can say that the MoCo bus system is far inferior to what I had in DC

Welcome to the club... the entire suburban DC area is overcrowded. Why should your neighborhood schools be spared while the rest suffer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

they’re not doing it in a way that keeps up with the needs for basic infrastructure. There are about 40 overcapacity schools in MoCo and traffic is terrible and as a regular bus user, I can say that the MoCo bus system is far inferior to what I had in DC

Welcome to the club... the entire suburban DC area is overcrowded. Why should your neighborhood schools be spared while the rest suffer?

So we should all suffer even more because MoCo doesn’t do basic infrastructure planning? Um, ok. That’s not the way intelligent people do urban planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

they’re not doing it in a way that keeps up with the needs for basic infrastructure. There are about 40 overcapacity schools in MoCo and traffic is terrible and as a regular bus user, I can say that the MoCo bus system is far inferior to what I had in DC

Welcome to the club... the entire suburban DC area is overcrowded. Why should your neighborhood schools be spared while the rest suffer?

So we should all suffer even more because MoCo doesn’t do basic infrastructure planning? Um, ok. That’s not the way intelligent people do urban planning.

No, but one demographic shouldn’t suffer more than another just because the other is wealthier. There is a population problem. It affects everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/politics/affluent-liberals-in-washington-dc-suburb-resort-to-racial-and-economic-stereotypes-to-protest-affordable-housing-proposal

This is making national news. Here they point out the irony of a solidly blue district being against affordable housing in their neighborhoods...

I don’t care if they raze my neighbor’s SFH and put up a multistory building, but there needs to be basic infrastructure that accompanies an increase in housing stock. Many of the neighborhoods where building is most likely to occur already have very overcapacity schools and big traffic snarls. If MoCo made corresponding investments in building new schools and adding buses, they might find people to be more amenable to these changes.

They're doing both.

they’re not doing it in a way that keeps up with the needs for basic infrastructure. There are about 40 overcapacity schools in MoCo and traffic is terrible and as a regular bus user, I can say that the MoCo bus system is far inferior to what I had in DC

That's how it has always worked in Montgomery County. The population grows, then more schools get built. (Except during the 1970s and 1980s, when the school population shrank, and schools got closed.) And buses are more efficient where the population density is greater.

[Anonymous]

What the County should do is to turn much of the commercial land along Rockville Pike, etc, into residential zoning for apartment buildings, town houses, etc. Much of that retail space will never be retail again. Moreover, the space is relatively near Metro and long standing bus routes. Turning SFHs into multi-family properties is NOT the answer. It will drive away many middle and upper class residents who want a SFH. [I include myself here.] And the County is already losing these residents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the County should do is to turn much of the commercial land along Rockville Pike, etc, into residential zoning for apartment buildings, town houses, etc. Much of that retail space will never be retail again. Moreover, the space is relatively near Metro and long standing bus routes. Turning SFHs into multi-family properties is NOT the answer. It will drive away many middle and upper class residents who want a SFH. [I include myself here.] And the County is already losing these residents.

the proposal quoted in the OP is to allow Accessory Dwelling Units, not to build apartment builings. ADU's are cheaper to build than new large buildings, and so can provide housing for people who, while they do not need a subsidy, cannot afford new apts/condos in large buildings.

There is no evidence it will drive people away, and in fact it may make it more financially feasible for some people to stay in their homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the County should do is to turn much of the commercial land along Rockville Pike, etc, into residential zoning for apartment buildings, town houses, etc. Much of that retail space will never be retail again. Moreover, the space is relatively near Metro and long standing bus routes. Turning SFHs into multi-family properties is NOT the answer. It will drive away many middle and upper class residents who want a SFH. [I include myself here.] And the County is already losing these residents.

Have you traveled along Rockville Pike lately? That's what the county is doing. And the City of Rockville too.

In addition:

1. There are lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of single-family-detached houses in Montgomery County. Plenty for people to live in who want that, even if the zoning is changed to allow duplexes.
2. This particular change is not turning single-family-detached houses into multi-family properties anyway. It's allowing people to build detached accessory dwelling units in their backyards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What the County should do is to turn much of the commercial land along Rockville Pike, etc, into residential zoning for apartment buildings, town houses, etc. Much of that retail space will never be retail again. Moreover, the space is relatively near Metro and long standing bus routes. Turning SFHs into multi-family properties is NOT the answer. It will drive away many middle and upper class residents who want a SFH. [I include myself here.] And the County is already losing these residents.

the proposal quoted in the OP is to allow Accessory Dwelling Units, not to build apartment builings. ADU's are cheaper to build than new large buildings, and so can provide housing for people who, while they do not need a subsidy, cannot afford new apts/condos in large buildings.

There is no evidence it will drive people away, and in fact it may make it more financially feasible for some people to stay in their homes.

I certainly have no interest in living in a SFH neighorhood with a bunch of ADUs attached to the SFHs. Similarly, I question whether the cost comparison between a single ADU behind some SFH and the per apartment cost of a large apartment building. Not all (and certainly hopefully) apartments in MC need to be high rent or luxury buildings. Developers can be provided incentives to provide high quality but cost effective apartments. Further, I would be concerned about the negative effect on property values of SFH neighborhoods with substantial ADUs. I do not want to live in such a neighborhood and would move.

[Anonymous]

What the ADU proposal risks producing is a MC with a large working class and lower middle class populations. The County is already driving away upper income residents. FACT is that a high percentage of income tax revenues, whether Federal, state or local, derive from upper income taxpayers. The numbers are simple. Top 50% of TPs pay over 95% of ALL income tax revenues, top 10% pay 70%, and top 1% pay over 37%. MC cant afford to drive away more upper income taxpayers, whether top 1% of even top 10%. And, finally, with the push to increase rates on upper income taxpayers (which I am not opposed), the County is only encouraging more to leave. DMV has plenty of nice places to live outside of MC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I certainly have no interest in living in a SFH neighorhood with a bunch of ADUs attached to the SFHs. Similarly, I question whether the cost comparison between a single ADU behind some SFH and the per apartment cost of a large apartment building. Not all (and certainly hopefully) apartments in MC need to be high rent or luxury buildings. Developers can be provided incentives to provide high quality but cost effective apartments. Further, I would be concerned about the negative effect on property values of SFH neighborhoods with substantial ADUs. I do not want to live in such a neighborhood and would move.

Fine. Then move.

By the way, there is no evidence that ADUs lower property values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I certainly have no interest in living in a SFH neighorhood with a bunch of ADUs attached to the SFHs. Similarly, I question whether the cost comparison between a single ADU behind some SFH and the per apartment cost of a large apartment building. Not all (and certainly hopefully) apartments in MC need to be high rent or luxury buildings. Developers can be provided incentives to provide high quality but cost effective apartments. Further, I would be concerned about the negative effect on property values of SFH neighborhoods with substantial ADUs. I do not want to live in such a neighborhood and would move.

Fine. Then move.

By the way, there is no evidence that ADUs lower property values.

ADUs impact on the neighborhood values are hard to study and there is a big difference for me between an attached ADU and a detached ADU. I don't care if your detached ADU actually increases my property value (although I highly HIGHLY doubt it) because I am paying to live in a SFH on a SFH street and I pay property taxes to the county that reflect that arrangement. I'm not interested in a neighborhood with lots of detached ADUs that are poorly constructed. I'm not interested in having your duplexes sandwiched in between the SFHs. I can move to a jurisdiction where at least the property taxes are lower. I don't like to be paying enormous taxes in MoCo and then my neighbor drops a shipping container in the backyard and rents it out. You can say Fine, then move but please understand that you need higher wage earners to pay taxes. That's just how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the ADU proposal risks producing is a MC with a large working class and lower middle class populations. The County is already driving away upper income residents. FACT is that a high percentage of income tax revenues, whether Federal, state or local, derive from upper income taxpayers. The numbers are simple. Top 50% of TPs pay over 95% of ALL income tax revenues, top 10% pay 70%, and top 1% pay over 37%. MC cant afford to drive away more upper income taxpayers, whether top 1% of even top 10%. And, finally, with the push to increase rates on upper income taxpayers (which I am not opposed), the County is only encouraging more to leave. DMV has plenty of nice places to live outside of MC.

I agree.