"No Mass Development on Mass Ave" signs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with these signs. County Council has done nothing but destroy Moco. They want river and Mass b/c God Forbid, they still have one area left in the county with good schools..

lets flood it with low income housing and take every afterschool program away.

Anyway, not sure what the vote was , but all these neighborhoods have created covenants to keep from teardowns becoming townhomes or apartments.

It passed. Overwhelmingly.

terrible county leadership. they ruin everything. time to go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with these signs. County Council has done nothing but destroy Moco. They want river and Mass b/c God Forbid, they still have one area left in the county with good schools..

lets flood it with low income housing and take every afterschool program away.

Anyway, not sure what the vote was , but all these neighborhoods have created covenants to keep from teardowns becoming townhomes or apartments.

It passed. Overwhelmingly.

terrible county leadership. they ruin everything. time to go

you vote these far leftists into power and this is what you get. Arlington just paused this same thing b/c it didnt create ANY affordable housing. MOCO just approved ADU's with the same thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with these signs. County Council has done nothing but destroy Moco. They want river and Mass b/c God Forbid, they still have one area left in the county with good schools..

lets flood it with low income housing and take every afterschool program away.

Anyway, not sure what the vote was , but all these neighborhoods have created covenants to keep from teardowns becoming townhomes or apartments.

It passed. Overwhelmingly.

There will be lawsuits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The County Council is about to vote on a proposal for upzoning across the county. They especially want to see mass development along Mass, River and other corridors, plus decimate single family neighborhoods within a mile of Metro.

maximizing housing near metro is smart policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with these signs. County Council has done nothing but destroy Moco. They want river and Mass b/c God Forbid, they still have one area left in the county with good schools..

lets flood it with low income housing and take every afterschool program away.

Anyway, not sure what the vote was , but all these neighborhoods have created covenants to keep from teardowns becoming townhomes or apartments.

I am sure you can sell your house for a 50% profit that someone else will be thrilled to purchase and you can move out to Howard or Frederick County and drive everywhere and live with generally soulless retail and food options. Have fun!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need more traffic on River Road and Mass Ave, and we need more overcrowded schools.

This is such a dumb talking point.

New housing doesn't cause new people to materialize out of thin air.

We need new housing because our population is growing - in many cases because people have children who grow up and don't want to live at home.

So the folks who need housing who we keep out of our neighborhoods will still be here they will just buy housing further out in the suburbs and guess what - they will still drive on River Road and Mass Avenue they will just driver greater distances on those roads.

And Montgomery County will have to spend more money, not less, on all of the infra including schools to accommodate them.

But maybe you don't have kids or your kids will live in your home forever?

So your position is that more housing won’t bring more residents and more kids for local schools to the neighborhood?

DP...once upon a time, there were people living in DC and where your house is was a forest or field. The choice today is to build more cul de sac housing way out in the exurbs, or take advantage of the regional investment in metro and concentrate more dense housing around the metro so the road capacity won't be further constrained. Does that mean there may be more schools needed with boundaries redrawn every decade or two? Sure. That is the way it has been for a century. There shouldn't be an expectation that human development is set in amber, never to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We don’t want for our neighborhoods to to be upzoned.
Our schools, services, traffic do not need this additional density. And it won’t benefit anyone but developers.

Benefits the people who will live there.