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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm from CA and agree that the people on the county council seem to be enamored within anything that the Bay Area does and calls progressive without a ounce of understanding.

In CA, ADUs make sense and the majority of citizens support them. Our lots and houses are much, much smaller so an ADU lets us have a guest room/guest house. There are many retirees who stay in place due to the property tax freeze but struggle to make ends meet with the rest of the high cost of living. The ADUs give them a much needed income source. The rental inventory is so low here that rents can easily double in a year. This happens at the same time as they tech giants bring in thousands of new workers every month. The ADUs are not being illegally rented to 12 people. They are going for a high price to single tech workers or the the couple who is priced out of renting because they don't make over 100K a year. The ADUs here are also getting used a lot by people's working age kids. Their kids can not afford housing in the area so if they land a job in tech or just want to stay in the area, an ADU on their parent's property is the only way to do it.

In Montgomery County, I have to scratch my head and wonder why. Rents are relatively cheap, not rising dramatically and the rental inventory always has vacant units. Retirees do not age in place here due to the taxes and climate. There doesn't seem to be a huge market for professionals that want to live in some else's backyard. AirBNB for people who live close in could be attractive but there are a lot of AirBNBs in DC. I'm not sure out of towners will decide gee I really want to visit Rockville , Olney or Silver Spring this summer. No one has every heard of these burbs outside the DMV.


Relative to San Francisco, one of the most expensive cities in the US.

San Francisco has terrible housing policies. Nobody would want to copy them - and Montgomery County's ADU regulation doesn't.

Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.

Rents might be cheap in comparison to your salary.

But almost all of the county's renters with household incomes below 50% of area median income (about $96,300 for a family of 3) are cost-burdened. And most of those spend more than 50% of their annual income (before taxes) on rent. Speaking of more important metrics.

[Anonymous]

^^^report here: https://montgomeryplanning.org/tools/research/special-studies/rental-housing-study/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.


Rents might be cheap in comparison to your salary.

But almost all of the county's renters with household incomes below 50% of area median income (about $96,300 for a family of 3) are cost-burdened. And most of those spend more than 50% of their annual income (before taxes) on rent. Speaking of more important metrics.

Economically there are plenty of less expensive rentals available in other areas of the county. These may not be as desirable as the ones that they would prefer but they cost less. They are available and sitting empty. You need to have the most desirable rentals to become unaffordable for most people in order to maintain the economic health of the other areas in the county. Its is not fiscally sound for the county to artificially try to push rental costs down when it has vacant inventory and declining revenues.

Ironically, the market may get in the county's desire to push down rental costs. Renting an ADU is often far less desirable than renting your own apartment, TH or SFH. You have to really, really want a location or have no other options. In the most desirable areas like Bethesda, its pretty questionable that there are many owners chomping at the but to have a long term tenant living in their backyard. Chances are that the more desirable areas will not have owners building ADUs go serve the greater good of giving low income people access to Bethesda. In fact pigs may fly before that happens. The people who will jump on it are those landlords in Wheaton that serve or prey upon people with fewer options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.


Rents might be cheap in comparison to your salary.

But almost all of the county's renters with household incomes below 50% of area median income (about $96,300 for a family of 3) are cost-burdened. And most of those spend more than 50% of their annual income (before taxes) on rent. Speaking of more important metrics.

Economically there are plenty of less expensive rentals available in other areas of the county. These may not be as desirable as the ones that they would prefer but they cost less. They are available and sitting empty. You need to have the most desirable rentals to become unaffordable for most people in order to maintain the economic health of the other areas in the county. Its is not fiscally sound for the county to artificially try to push rental costs down when it has vacant inventory and declining revenues.

Ironically, the market may get in the county's desire to push down rental costs. Renting an ADU is often far less desirable than renting your own apartment, TH or SFH. You have to really, really want a location or have no other options. In the most desirable areas like Bethesda, its pretty questionable that there are many owners chomping at the but to have a long term tenant living in their backyard. Chances are that the more desirable areas will not have owners building ADUs go serve the greater good of giving low income people access to Bethesda. In fact pigs may fly before that happens. The people who will jump on it are those landlords in Wheaton that serve or prey upon people with fewer options.

This.

And it is partially why Montgomery County politicians got behind this. They want to ensure a solid housing supply for recent immigrants. The county elite must want to ensure they have a solid supply of low wage employees. I can’t imagine why else people would think this is a good idea. That, plus the many landlords that will benefit from the additional income.

There are definitely plenty of rental options available in Montgomery County. Expanding the ADU provisions was not necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.


Rents might be cheap in comparison to your salary.

But almost all of the county's renters with household incomes below 50% of area median income (about $96,300 for a family of 3) are cost-burdened. And most of those spend more than 50% of their annual income (before taxes) on rent. Speaking of more important metrics.

Economically there are plenty of less expensive rentals available in other areas of the county. These may not be as desirable as the ones that they would prefer but they cost less. They are available and sitting empty. You need to have the most desirable rentals to become unaffordable for most people in order to maintain the economic health of the other areas in the county. Its is not fiscally sound for the county to artificially try to push rental costs down when it has vacant inventory and declining revenues.

Ironically, the market may get in the county's desire to push down rental costs. Renting an ADU is often far less desirable than renting your own apartment, TH or SFH. You have to really, really want a location or have no other options. In the most desirable areas like Bethesda, its pretty questionable that there are many owners chomping at the but to have a long term tenant living in their backyard. Chances are that the more desirable areas will not have owners building ADUs go serve the greater good of giving low income people access to Bethesda. In fact pigs may fly before that happens. The people who will jump on it are those landlords in Wheaton that serve or prey upon people with fewer options.

Exactly.

This is how the Middle Class gets screwed yet again.

People in Bethesda and Potomac enjoy their space and won't see an influx for ADUs.

Yet, neighborhoods that are not as wealthy will see these changes. It used to be limited to Silver Spring and parts of Wheaton where you'd see these illegal rentals. Now, they're truly all over the county. Definitely closer in, like Twinbrook, Aspen Hill, but even as far out as Olney, Gaithersburg, Germantown, etc.

So, the wealthy are not negatively affected, the immigrants get their inexpensive housing, and the middle class neighborhoods are decimated with overtaxed schools and overcrowded neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This.

And it is partially why Montgomery County politicians got behind this. They want to ensure a solid housing supply for recent immigrants. The county elite must want to ensure they have a solid supply of low wage employees. I can’t imagine why else people would think this is a good idea. That, plus the many landlords that will benefit from the additional income.

There are definitely plenty of rental options available in Montgomery County. Expanding the ADU provisions was not necessary.

Anybody who says this hasn't been a renter recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Rents are cheap in comparison to the rest of the DMV or at least DC and VA. Rents are cheap in comparison to salaries which is the more important metric.


Rents might be cheap in comparison to your salary.

But almost all of the county's renters with household incomes below 50% of area median income (about $96,300 for a family of 3) are cost-burdened. And most of those spend more than 50% of their annual income (before taxes) on rent. Speaking of more important metrics.

Economically there are plenty of less expensive rentals available in other areas of the county. These may not be as desirable as the ones that they would prefer but they cost less. They are available and sitting empty. You need to have the most desirable rentals to become unaffordable for most people in order to maintain the economic health of the other areas in the county. Its is not fiscally sound for the county to artificially try to push rental costs down when it has vacant inventory and declining revenues.

Ironically, the market may get in the county's desire to push down rental costs. Renting an ADU is often far less desirable than renting your own apartment, TH or SFH. You have to really, really want a location or have no other options. In the most desirable areas like Bethesda, its pretty questionable that there are many owners chomping at the but to have a long term tenant living in their backyard. Chances are that the more desirable areas will not have owners building ADUs go serve the greater good of giving low income people access to Bethesda. In fact pigs may fly before that happens. The people who will jump on it are those landlords in Wheaton that serve or prey upon people with fewer options.

You all are just making stuff up about the rental market in Montgomery County, and I don't understand why.

https://montgomeryplanning.org/blog-design/2017/01/study-of-rental-housing-in-montgomery-county-reveals-shortage-of-affordable-dwellings/

For one thing, if there really were plenty of less expensive rentals available in other areas of the county, people wouldn't be doubling or tripling up in houses in the way you're complaining about.

[Anonymous]

The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

What's the necessary paperwork for renting to someone? And why wouldn't you need it for living in a house but would need it for living in an apartment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

This.

It’s a win-win. Landlords get to collect cash only rent that they don’t pay taxes on. Tenants get a place to live.

So, it’s not an issue of there not being any empty apartments.

This was passed to give illegal immigrants options for rentals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

This.

It’s a win-win. Landlords get to collect cash only rent that they don’t pay taxes on. Tenants get a place to live.

So, it’s not an issue of there not being any empty apartments.

This was passed to give illegal immigrants options for rentals.

I can just imagine those law-ignoring landlords eagerly lobbying the county council to pass another regulation for them to ignore.

Wait, what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be PP in a similar situation where the owner is illegally renting to a family here’s what you do:

We had that happen in our neighborhood, we repeatedly made complaints until the families were gone. I’m afraid to list the neighborhood in MoCo. There were no less than 15 people living in one 4 bedroom home. They never cut the grass, their unwanted trash/mail would fly over on other’s properties. There would be loud/drunken parties past all hours of the night on the weekends. Some of the young teens would skip school and have ‘mid-day parties. Someone hit our parked car (we caught it on camera). Concerned neighbors raised cane, we had a rotation of neighbors call the county or write an email everyday. Stay vigilant, we do not want California ‘progressive’ laws out here. San Francisco is not a pretty city, behind the dirt there.

Thanks for the concrete suggestions. Neighbors are definitely unhappy about the situation. We have the same issues - parties (fine on weekends, but even during the week?!), trash everywhere, etc.

DP. Yes, the parties.....

This used to be a decent family neighborhood, with everyone realizing that schoolchildren need their sleep, and it was quiet in the evenings. Now, at least two or three evenings a week, the house behind my parents' house has large, loud parties that go until 2:00 a.m. I've seen many adults come in and out of that house, along with small children. I wouldn't be surprised if 15 people, including an assortment of children, were renting there.

And yes, the police have been called a multiple of times. It gets quiet for a week or so, and then it starts up again. Why aren't these people evicted? Are MoCo officials so in favor of illegal immigrants that they let them get away with behavior unacceptable from legal residents me citizens?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

This.

It’s a win-win. Landlords get to collect cash only rent that they don’t pay taxes on. Tenants get a place to live.

So, it’s not an issue of there not being any empty apartments.

This was passed to give illegal immigrants options for rentals.

Agree. And with their upside liberal priorities, they are more concerned with giving illegals a place to live than they are with the ne horrible consequences the law will have on American families and their neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The overcrowded houses are due to the reality that many of those individuals are undocumented. It’s not necessarily due to the cost of rent. They can’t get an apartment because they are paid cash and cannot produce the necessary paperwork.

This.

It’s a win-win. Landlords get to collect cash only rent that they don’t pay taxes on. Tenants get a place to live.

So, it’s not an issue of there not being any empty apartments.

This was passed to give illegal immigrants options for rentals.

I can just imagine those law-ignoring landlords eagerly lobbying the county council to pass another regulation for them to ignore.

Wait, what?

No landlords had to lobby the county council. The County Council wants illegal immigrants to feel welcome and have rental options.