Why do they allow all the tear downs in Bethesda?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is the “they” in your question? Bethesda is just a geographic area. There is no Bethesda government. Some neighborhoods do have covenants that prohibit tear downs. But the housing stock is pretty old. Some of these houses need to be torn down.

"They" is MoCo government.

"They" have the power to impose housing regulations.

For the most part, they do not.

Hence: Teardowns, McMansions, and socioeconomic segregation.

RE old housing stock needing to be torn down, those who live in charming towns and villages in e.g. New England would beg to differ.

NP. That is the person you quoted's point. Bethesda does not have a government, or historic district like Rockville, Gaithersburg, Frederick and other towns have. The county is the only point of regulations and they do not care if there is a charming home is being destroyed.

PP, it sounds like you need to live in DC, in a historic preservation district, where aesthetics is controlled by a quasi-government board. But if you stay in Bethesda, please get it through your thick skull that one person's "charming home" is another person's outdated eyesore that is not well suited for modern life. You do not get to dictate aesthetic preferences to your neighbors. If you like the houses so much, buy them, keep them as is and rent them out.

You have issues, and are replying to multiple people. I did not stay in Bethesda. It's an ugly area with too many people (who mainly have attitudes like yours).

"well suited for modern life"

I replied to you, the dolt who made the comment about "charming homes being destroyed." Unless you have multiple personalities, that reply was to one person.

What about "well suited for modern life" is difficult for you? Just like houses built in the 1870s were not well suited, without substantial and costly modification, for life in the 1940s, houses built in the 1940s were not well suited for life in the 2010s, and beyond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like charming homes. I own a little beach bungalow in a small town in the Northeast. The town next to it is a Bethesda type place, my town is a big pain in the ass to build. First resident only parking one car per house on street. Want to build good luck no parking allowed. We also have a three story height restriction, we also banned new commercial properties and new multifamily housing in 1985.

In 1985 condos, apartment buildings, commercial properties were built like crazy in town next to us. My town 33 years later homes sell for a lot more. We have the access to their amenities with none of headaches.

Bethesda will end up this way. So popular folks won't want to live there. In Manhattan no one wants to rent in Times Square same concept. Too busy and annoying to live there.

You win the Yogi Berra award. Do you know what units in TS in NY rent for?

It's funny the PP doesn't know that Bethesda is too annoying to want to live there right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Please explain how townhouses on your street reduces your quality of life.

They don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP, it sounds like you need to live in DC, in a historic preservation district, where aesthetics is controlled by a quasi-government board. But if you stay in Bethesda, please get it through your thick skull that one person's "charming home" is another person's outdated eyesore that is not well suited for modern life. You do not get to dictate aesthetic preferences to your neighbors. If you like the houses so much, buy them, keep them as is and rent them out.

You have issues, and are replying to multiple people. I did not stay in Bethesda. It's an ugly area with too many people (who mainly have attitudes like yours).

"well suited for modern life"

I replied to you, the dolt who made the comment about "charming homes being destroyed." Unless you have multiple personalities, that reply was to one person.

What about "well suited for modern life" is difficult for you? Just like houses built in the 1870s were not well suited, without substantial and costly modification, for life in the 1940s, houses built in the 1940s were not well suited for life in the 2010s, and beyond.

I'm happy you will have space in your McMansion to store hover board, Alexa, and wine fridge.

I'll stick with my historic home on a large lot with my outhouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Please explain how townhouses on your street reduces your quality of life.

They don't.

Good. You ARE aware that in most of the parcels where McMansions are popping up, its illegal to build THs, and in most of those if it were not illegal to build THs, there would be no McMansions, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I drive through Bethesda a lot and any smaller cute original home that gives neighborhood charm is being torn down. Then these massiive plywood boxes go up that lack any style, are cheaply made, take up most of lot and casts shadows on neighbors. Big houses usually have more occupants but given size of house on plot they have less parking.

The traffic gets worse and worse with each new McMansion and the construction is a nightmare for neighbors.

Why does Bethesda allow it? Can't they put brakes on it or at least tax these new homes at a higher rate? My old town outside Maryland had lots of cute original homes with tons of character. A tear down on my old neighborhood never happen and homes were all 1940s and 1950s homes. We tax on build quality and square footage. New construction pays 100 percent higher tax rate per square foot and new construction is usually bigger.

Knock down a 1500 sf house with 6k taxes and build a 3,000 sf new home taxes are 24,000. Or make the whole thing historical. They have to stop the madness. It also kills young families. No more small older starter homes to buy. No more downsizing homes to buy. Just large overpriced boxes.

Do you think something like this is possible?

There is this whole concept of the rights of a property owner

[Anonymous]

I actually like a lot of the new homes that are being built on the lots were old dumpy houses have been torn down. I don’t think mid century split foyer’s are exactly attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Please explain how townhouses on your street reduces your quality of life.

They don't.

Good. You ARE aware that in most of the parcels where McMansions are popping up, its illegal to build THs, and in most of those if it were not illegal to build THs, there would be no McMansions, right?

Sure. I'm not sure what your point is, though. I am not opposed to McMansions (though they aren't my cup of tea) or townhouses (same). Bethesda, and most other areas, would benefit from some diversity in housing choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP, it sounds like you need to live in DC, in a historic preservation district, where aesthetics is controlled by a quasi-government board. But if you stay in Bethesda, please get it through your thick skull that one person's "charming home" is another person's outdated eyesore that is not well suited for modern life. You do not get to dictate aesthetic preferences to your neighbors. If you like the houses so much, buy them, keep them as is and rent them out.

You have issues, and are replying to multiple people. I did not stay in Bethesda. It's an ugly area with too many people (who mainly have attitudes like yours).

"well suited for modern life"

I replied to you, the dolt who made the comment about "charming homes being destroyed." Unless you have multiple personalities, that reply was to one person.

What about "well suited for modern life" is difficult for you? Just like houses built in the 1870s were not well suited, without substantial and costly modification, for life in the 1940s, houses built in the 1940s were not well suited for life in the 2010s, and beyond.

I'm happy you will have space in your McMansion to store hover board, Alexa, and wine fridge.

I'll stick with my historic home on a large lot with my outhouse.

The fact that you think this is solely about space shows that you aren't really equipped for this discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Please explain how townhouses on your street reduces your quality of life.

They don't.

Good. You ARE aware that in most of the parcels where McMansions are popping up, its illegal to build THs, and in most of those if it were not illegal to build THs, there would be no McMansions, right?

Sure. I'm not sure what your point is, though. I am not opposed to McMansions (though they aren't my cup of tea) or townhouses (same). Bethesda, and most other areas, would benefit from some diversity in housing choices.

My point is that those making a quasi libertarian defense of McMansions ("property owners should get to do what they want with their own property" "you should ignore what your neighbor does on his property" etc) generally ignore the way that McMansions are in fact the product of govt intervention in the market - they occur in places where there is significant demand for added sq ft (not just because existing houses are old) and in most of those, the free market would likely supply new THs rather than very large detached SFHs, were it not for zoning. IE our existing zoning code tends to restrict THs in high demand areas where it allows large SFHs (on standard sized lots) thus privileging and effectively encouraging McMansions. Now I am realistic enough to not expect zoning or historic preservation to limit teardowns in most places, and don't expect upzoning of detached SFH parcels in more than a handful of places, but I find the property rights/free market rhetoric deployed by McMansion defenders tiresome.

[Anonymous]

OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

[Anonymous]

Clearly, Bethesda needs more townhouse developments to allow for greater density and smart growth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clearly, Bethesda needs more townhouse developments to allow for greater density and smart growth.

The whole region needs more TH developments to address "the missing middle" of housing for non wealthy, non poor families. Hard to imagine a place more suited than one with excellent transit and walkability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly, Bethesda needs more townhouse developments to allow for greater density and smart growth.

The whole region needs more TH developments to address "the missing middle" of housing for non wealthy, non poor families. Hard to imagine a place more suited than one with excellent transit and walkability.

Don't assume that townhouse developments are going to be at a price point for the missing middle. Look at all the EYA townhouse communities that are being built - they are in the million dollar range. The land is too expensive to build for the missing middle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is obviously one of the oldsters who bought his/her tiny Bethesda house 20 years ago for next to nothing and, despite benefiting greatly from appreciation over the years due to all of the nice new houses in the neighborhood, cannot afford one himself/herself, and is now bitching that the nice, big Craftsman-style house next door is creating shade on his/her shitty little tomato garden.

They’re not nice, they are hideously cheaply made ugly boxes with weird triable and box things sticking out all over haphazardly. They are not often nice craftsman houses at all, they are awful things to look at.

There is a builder named ‘Mimar’ who is building awful , ugly large homes in our neighborhood. They are just awful to look at.

Not all new homes are awful looking - there was a builder known as ‘Welty’ , for instance, who built attractive well made homes. Most of the ones going up now are real stinkers. And the neighborhood is just flat out dumb to not be negotiating some kind of benefit for the community for having to deal with the nonstop construction vehicles and noise of construction and to have these builders and realtors share a tiny bit of the immense profits for the good of the neighborhood.

Are all old houses nice and full of character?

Also, stop saying "neighborhood" or "blending in." There is nothing to blend in with. New houses ARE the neighborhood, they ARE the community.