MoCo “Attainable Housing” plan and property values

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The house I grew up in build 1923 backed to a 160 acre farm.

After WWII there was a housing shortage for all the returning soldiers.

So they built 1,600 garden apt style apartments back in 1953. My house now 101 years old is worth around 100k less.

It was a bigger percentage discount because of an apartments in 1974 when parents bought hose as done. But they went coop in 1985 which brought in owners and better maintenance of buildings

The devaluation Effect is forever

Your house is worth 100k less now than in 1953? Seems unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm very supportive. It will increase housing opportunities and incentivize more environmentally-friendly walkable development.

The hypothetical narrow effect on my own personal property value is not a driver of my view on this.

Must mean that these rules would not be applicable where you live. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, so the developer who buys the older house will either build a giant one that he can sell for $3M+ in these nicer neighborhoods or a fourplex he can sell for $1M+ per unit, making the neighborhood now more “attainable” because a family can buy in at $1M vs $3M. But none of it is affordable.

Exactly. And your new neighbors will have 4x number of vehicles, somewhere, and 4x number of kids going to local schools, the existing utilities will be expected to cover all this new demand. 5 new homes have gone up on our our suburban block, that is within 1 mile of the metro, in the last 10 years. 5 families lived in the prior homes, and 5 different ones now live in these newer homes. The block would be vastly different (and much more crowded (just like the street and school bus stop and classrooms) if instead 20 new families were added to the block over this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The house I grew up in build 1923 backed to a 160 acre farm.

After WWII there was a housing shortage for all the returning soldiers.

So they built 1,600 garden apt style apartments back in 1953. My house now 101 years old is worth around 100k less.

It was a bigger percentage discount because of an apartments in 1974 when parents bought hose as done. But they went coop in 1985 which brought in owners and better maintenance of buildings

The devaluation Effect is forever

Wut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

OK, whatever. There's a map on page 5 of the powerpoint. If you're south of Rockville, you will be affected. As it turns out, the poor people who purportedly need this "attainable" housing wouldn't deign to live in the northern part of the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The house I grew up in build 1923 backed to a 160 acre farm.

After WWII there was a housing shortage for all the returning soldiers.

So they built 1,600 garden apt style apartments back in 1953. My house now 101 years old is worth around 100k less.

It was a bigger percentage discount because of an apartments in 1974 when parents bought hose as done. But they went coop in 1985 which brought in owners and better maintenance of buildings

The devaluation Effect is forever

Your house is worth 100k less now than in 1953? Seems unlikely.

Homes not backing an apt complex go for 100k more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will ruin neighborhoods and reduce properties values in some neighborhoods without protections from excessive density. Neighborhoods with protective covenants and HOA's that prevent multifamily housing will become more valuable. Some properties close in that have higher redevelopment potential will increase in value due to higher land prices. Many of the others will lose value and resident quality of life will go down hill. Single family communities close to high quality private schools with strong HOA/Covenants to protect thew neighborhood are likely safe. However, many middle class homeowners in desirable school attendance zones will be financially destroyed if this passes.

Have any of these things happened with Missing Middle in Arlington?

It has only been a year for Arlington. The new multifamily properties haven't even been built yet.

Well, and there is a rather expensive lawsuit going on that might put a stop to it all, so you’d have to be pretty brave to be developing that land before it gets settled. Arlington has hired a very expensive firm at taxpayer expense to keep themselves from being even more of a laughingstock. They are even trying to intimidate the plaintiffs.

https://www.arlnow.com/2024/04/30/missing-middle-critic-subpoenaed-as-county-seeks-to-know-what-forces-are-behind-lawsuit/

The trial starts 7/8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

OK, whatever. There's a map on page 5 of the powerpoint. If you're south of Rockville, you will be affected. As it turns out, the poor people who purportedly need this "attainable" housing wouldn't deign to live in the northern part of the county.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of poor people who live in the northern part of the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

OK, whatever. There's a map on page 5 of the powerpoint. If you're south of Rockville, you will be affected. As it turns out, the poor people who purportedly need this "attainable" housing wouldn't deign to live in the northern part of the county.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of poor people who live in the northern part of the county.

Yes, lots of poor people figure their lives out and make things work. Others whine about affordable housing and think they're entitled to live in Bethesda; the planning board seems eager to help them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, so the developer who buys the older house will either build a giant one that he can sell for $3M+ in these nicer neighborhoods or a fourplex he can sell for $1M+ per unit, making the neighborhood now more “attainable” because a family can buy in at $1M vs $3M. But none of it is affordable.

Exactly. And your new neighbors will have 4x number of vehicles, somewhere, and 4x number of kids going to local schools, the existing utilities will be expected to cover all this new demand. 5 new homes have gone up on our our suburban block, that is within 1 mile of the metro, in the last 10 years. 5 families lived in the prior homes, and 5 different ones now live in these newer homes. The block would be vastly different (and much more crowded (just like the street and school bus stop and classrooms) if instead 20 new families were added to the block over this time.

Most of the time no one will be selling individual units of a fourplex. They will be owned investors that rent them out, making home ownership less accessible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t wanna upzone because of progressive values. I want to upzone because I am a libertarian that believes in minimal zoning. Zoning is literally big government telling me what to do with my property. We need to abolish zoning short of industrial facilities. No reason commercial needs to be separated from residential. The corner store ideal and all the wonderful neighborhood interactions are dead thanks to zoning. The suburbs killed society and everybody is too alienated because they have to drive everywhere

so you’d be OK with a commercial building on each side of your suburban house?

[Anonymous]

You get what you vote for. We liked Moco but it was obvious that politically the future isn’t bright. Between the illegal immigrants and proposed changes to schools, zoning and housing policies, it seemed too risky. Also how Covid was handled and a state government that doesn’t support or encourage job creation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

OK, whatever. There's a map on page 5 of the powerpoint. If you're south of Rockville, you will be affected. As it turns out, the poor people who purportedly need this "attainable" housing wouldn't deign to live in the northern part of the county.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of poor people who live in the northern part of the county.

Yes, lots of poor people figure their lives out and make things work. Others whine about affordable housing and think they're entitled to live in Bethesda; the planning board seems eager to help them!

One poster was complaining about there being too many cars. Putting people upcounty will definitely get you too many cars. In density not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again. For instance, in Bethesda and Chevy Chase, old houses get sold as tear downs. New, bigger houses go up in their place. Affordability declines but the neighborhood, by some measures, gets "nicer".

Do the changes discussed in the report mean that more of these tear downs are going to be rebuilt as duplexes, triplexes and small apartment buildings? In the middle of what otherwise are suburban single family neighborhoods? If so, how can we tell if our house, street falls into such a (re) zone?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. And if it doesn't matter if your house is in a zone that's being targeted, because once they start down this path, they will not stop.

Well, that’s silly. It certainly matters to ME whether my house is in a zone that’s being targeted. Just as I am less concerned about school redistricting that doesn’t affect my street or neighborhood. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about everything.

OK, whatever. There's a map on page 5 of the powerpoint. If you're south of Rockville, you will be affected. As it turns out, the poor people who purportedly need this "attainable" housing wouldn't deign to live in the northern part of the county.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of poor people who live in the northern part of the county.

Yes, lots of poor people figure their lives out and make things work. Others whine about affordable housing and think they're entitled to live in Bethesda; the planning board seems eager to help them!

One poster was complaining about there being too many cars. Putting people upcounty will definitely get you too many cars. In density not so much.

The estimated travel times and cost of public transport are not going to get folks in these to-be-developed zones point to point, broadly -- to work, to shop (without great encumbrance, to boot), etc., where that would present a good alternative to driving. The added density of this type simply will bring more cars to the local area.