MoCo Housing Strategies effect on MCPS

[Anonymous]

I'd add that in the past decade+ we've been building many more apartments than SFH. As a result SFH have become unaffordable to the middle class. Our county is attracting very rich and very poor people. We need to build middle class housing and I think this plan offers to build a little of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Marc Elrich's interview WTOP is a good summary of the many problems with the Attainable Housing Initiative. In short this is not about affordable housing. If you can't read this, just read the following snippet:

Anne Kramer: If this becomes a proposal that the county council considers, if I understand this correctly, you don’t have the power to override it. So what other alternatives are there then?

Marc Elrich: Well, there are no other immediate alternatives. The council is going to make a decision about what they’re going to do. I think this whole dismissal of what people think about their neighborhoods is kind of stunning. This is a place where we pride ourselves, and everybody comes here. People discover great neighborhoods they want to live in. The idea that the council can just decide at random that people can build by right things, that the master plans, that people moved into the neighborhoods thinking they were going to have that, they don’t have that anymore, is kind of shocking.

If this was done for a reason, where you could say, ‘We have to do this to get affordable housing. This is the only way we can get affordable housing.’ I’d think differently about it, but this is a fraud the way they presented it. There’s no other word to use for it.

https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2024/09/montgomery-co-exec-elrich-says-initiative-pitched-as-promoting-affordable-housing-is-misleading-and-a-fraud/

Wow, I like Elrich as a person but this is preposterous. Fraud? Wow. He's basically saying the county doesn't have the authority to make zoning changes, which is false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

[Anonymous]

Very little of this thread seems to be about the effect on MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Very little of this thread seems to be about the effect on MCPS.

The main effect of this on MCPS is that the gap in the capital budget will get even bigger because impact fees are set below seat costs and because the Attainable Housing Strategy proposed setting some impact fees at zero. If you like overcrowded schools, this is your strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd add that in the past decade+ we've been building many more apartments than SFH. As a result SFH have become unaffordable to the middle class. Our county is attracting very rich and very poor people. We need to build middle class housing and I think this plan offers to build a little of it.

You seem to be equating middle class housing with SFH. That doesn't work. The land itself makes that infeasible. Higher density is the only way to make housing affordable for the middle class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very little of this thread seems to be about the effect on MCPS.

The main effect of this on MCPS is that the gap in the capital budget will get even bigger because impact fees are set below seat costs and because the Attainable Housing Strategy proposed setting some impact fees at zero. If you like overcrowded schools, this is your strategy.

The capital budget does not need to come from only impact fees. We paid for schools long before impact fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

So parking for 1 house would become parking for 5 houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

Those are projects of very different scale, with different developers and different investors.

If it impacts large-scale projects at all, it would be because increased housing stock has reduced housing prices. That by itself would be good news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

So parking for 1 house would become parking for 5 houses.

A lot of housing doesn't come with dedicated/assigned parking spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

So parking for 1 house would become parking for 5 houses.

A lot of housing doesn't come with dedicated/assigned parking spots.

Oh but...wasn't the county working on encouraging walking, biking (adding bike lanes), and using public transportation? No need, right, to discuss parking spots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

Those are projects of very different scale, with different developers and different investors.

If it impacts large-scale projects at all, it would be because increased housing stock has reduced housing prices. That by itself would be good news.

I’m not suggesting capital would shift to multiplexes. I’m suggesting that demand is constant at a given price and the small apartment projects would draw demand from the large ones. Big developers definitely are aware of the competitive environment and avoid projects where there’s competition for consumers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they have any projections of the impact on schools? I feel like this would maybe add 10 families per year to an elementary school boundary area. Just based on how many houses would get sold in a year to a developer who chooses to build a duplex or triplex or quadplex. Not all of them have school-age kids and if they do not all at the same level. So maybe 2 kids per year to each elementary, 8-12 to middle and high schools? They should really be trying to calculate this and the cost to the school system and how that will be paid for. It will probably add more property tax revenue.

They don’t even have projections of how many units will be built or whether the strategy will cause prices to rise or fall. They assume it will make prices go down because they assume multiplexes won’t affect other apartment/condo production and because they didn’t take economics past Econ 101.

PP here. Number of units built seems very difficult to project. I can't imagine any projection would be remotely correct. I think the number of units would be marginal at best and the impact on prices will also be very marginal.

I'm curious though, are you saying if they build a quadplex that means 3 fewer units in a large apartment building?

I’m not looking for a precise number of units. I’m looking for rough orders of magnitude.

Yes, I am saying if they build quads (not just one, which won’t make a difference), will fewer large apartment building be built? I would put that in the category of bad outcomes because we would lose single family housing stock without adding any multi family units beyond what was going to be built anyway.

I think of duplexes etc. as very different from apartment buildings. They are essentially townhouses. They are attached single family homes.

Anyone who is talking about duplexes hasn’t been following this. The number of duplexes that get built would be in the dozens because the math doesn’t work well in most places. I agree that duplexes are different and would be helpful but so would unicorns. Townhouses would be good too and they work in a few more places.

Anything stacked is going to be a substitute for apartments. Most of the units added are going to be stacked because the math generally works better for those. We will trade SFH for apartments, which is bad for the housing market.

But what they are proposing making "by right" is small scale which is up to 2.5 stories. Quadplexes won't be allowed everywhere - that is for near transit/growth corridors. So they can't so three stacked units by right, perhaps 2 and 2 stacked units in some places. If what you are saying is right then most neighborhoods won't be impacted by this at all since they aren't going to build any significant number of side by side duplexes or triplexes.

A triplex is a basement apartment plus two above-ground apartments and fits within the 2.5-story envelope. 2x2s are also apartment substitutes. A lot of land will be available for apartment/condo construction, and some will be built. It’s hard to see how this doesn’t suppress starts on large projects, so at least some of the units gained through upzoning will be offset by large projects not built. In addition, the mere possibility of more units entering the market through small projects may make big developers less likely to build big projects. These are the hearts of our downtown cores, so if there’s a slowdown in production, it’s not just the housing market that will hurt.

So parking for 1 house would become parking for 5 houses.

A lot of housing doesn't come with dedicated/assigned parking spots.

That is different from a home with no possible parking.