all these affordable housing do gooders are doing the billionaires' work

[Anonymous]

Keep in mind all this upzoning is a natural and predictable consequence of mass immigration of low wage workers. You can't have your "No human is illegal" and "Stop ICE" yard signs and not expect this.

The upzoning is to provide homes for these people close enough to you that they can mow your lawns, cook your food and watch your kids. They of course would rather live close to the people that defend and employ them rather than to live out in Waldorf or something and commute in for 2 hours for their low-paying jobs.

So rant on as you like, but you're just getting exactly what you asked for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind all this upzoning is a natural and predictable consequence of mass immigration of low wage workers. You can't have your "No human is illegal" and "Stop ICE" yard signs and not expect this.

The upzoning is to provide homes for these people close enough to you that they can mow your lawns, cook your food and watch your kids. They of course would rather live close to the people that defend and employ them rather than to live out in Waldorf or something and commute in for 2 hours for their low-paying jobs.

So rant on as you like, but you're just getting exactly what you asked for.

Except they never build anything that the cooks, landscapers, and childcare workers can afford.

The infill building is always very expensive housing, whether it’s for rent or purchase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will also point out how myopic this group is: they only want to build more apartments, with no regard to infrastructure like traffic, schools, libraries, police and fire stations, parks to play in for all the kids who inevitably are going to end up living in those apartments. Any anyone who disagrees with them, or brings up any other angles (including schools), is immediately labeled a racist/bigot

+1. Or they are just labeled a NIMBY. But it’s not NIMBYism to point out that schools are over capacity (where that’s the case) or that traffic is a nightmare and the public transit system is tens of billions of dollars and years away from being a functional substitute in many places.

what schools are over capcity? Not the ones in ward 3...this isn't 10 years ago.
Traffic is going to be a nightmare for as long as single occupancy vehicles, mostly from MD and VA are given priority to use limited road space over mass transit and scooters/bikes and pedestrians.

Fact - this isn't 1955 and living the Boomer dream is not going to work in the 21st century - our built environment needs to change to accommodate a post boomer world, no matter how much the boomers don't want to face it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

The US has been emphasizing SFH since the end of WW2 if not longer. It’s not why there are issues with housing affordability today.

Uh, it actually is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

PP here - thank you for answering the question. I have to admit I'm not very well versed on this subject. I always thought/ assumed "missing middle" housing meant houses for the low middle to middle middle class families. So like where I grew up, which was a SFH, but a small one on a small lot. All the families in our neighborhood were working class, or mid-level professionals. Nothing like the mcmansions of today. But it sounds like I'm wrong, and "missing middle" means something else? Cause in my experience I feel like there's plenty of options for singles or couples (apartments/condos), but no where where I can raise a family without being really rich. Every time I see another "mixed use" development going up I get so depressed, because it's always just condos and apartments. But maybe the "American dream" of a house with a little yard and family is just dead?

Missing middle are the 4 plexes and small apartment buildings like you might see behind a 6 story building on a main transit corridor or before you get to the single family areas. Or in real cities like Chicago or Philadelphia where you see smaller multi-unit buildings mixed in with duplexes and single family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind all this upzoning is a natural and predictable consequence of mass immigration of low wage workers. You can't have your "No human is illegal" and "Stop ICE" yard signs and not expect this.

The upzoning is to provide homes for these people close enough to you that they can mow your lawns, cook your food and watch your kids. They of course would rather live close to the people that defend and employ them rather than to live out in Waldorf or something and commute in for 2 hours for their low-paying jobs.

So rant on as you like, but you're just getting exactly what you asked for.

Except they never build anything that the cooks, landscapers, and childcare workers can afford.

The infill building is always very expensive housing, whether it’s for rent or purchase.

Maybe I don't get the coded language being used, but then who is "leaving trash everywhere, parking a million cars and generally ruining a neighborhood?" Middle-class millennials? If its not low wage workers, what exactly are you all collectively freaking out about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

PP here - thank you for answering the question. I have to admit I'm not very well versed on this subject. I always thought/ assumed "missing middle" housing meant houses for the low middle to middle middle class families. So like where I grew up, which was a SFH, but a small one on a small lot. All the families in our neighborhood were working class, or mid-level professionals. Nothing like the mcmansions of today. But it sounds like I'm wrong, and "missing middle" means something else? Cause in my experience I feel like there's plenty of options for singles or couples (apartments/condos), but no where where I can raise a family without being really rich. Every time I see another "mixed use" development going up I get so depressed, because it's always just condos and apartments. But maybe the "American dream" of a house with a little yard and family is just dead?

Plenty of people want the same thing you describe. But they keep building luxury condo and apartment buildings. The supporters hate single family homes even though many people would prefer a small single family home over living in a multi family building.

Yes they have a million reasons why they can’t build small SFHs but can slap up “luxury” apartments made of cardboard. And they always insist that the target market is “young professionals” who will apparently never get older or reproduce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

PP here - thank you for answering the question. I have to admit I'm not very well versed on this subject. I always thought/ assumed "missing middle" housing meant houses for the low middle to middle middle class families. So like where I grew up, which was a SFH, but a small one on a small lot. All the families in our neighborhood were working class, or mid-level professionals. Nothing like the mcmansions of today. But it sounds like I'm wrong, and "missing middle" means something else? Cause in my experience I feel like there's plenty of options for singles or couples (apartments/condos), but no where where I can raise a family without being really rich. Every time I see another "mixed use" development going up I get so depressed, because it's always just condos and apartments. But maybe the "American dream" of a house with a little yard and family is just dead?

Don’t let these people fool you. Missing middle is just millennials that want to own a place in a desirable area but can’t afford to. They couldn’t care less about families. They certainly don’t want them in SFHs.

Wow, just wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Blah blah blah. You are missing the point. You know what happens when they build massive 800 unit apartments near certain corridors, but behind them are neighborhoods? All those units have multiple dwellers who start parking their cars all over neighborhoods. There is an overabundance of trash, crowding, and congestion. You don't need to raze all SFH, you just need to build one massive sh!tty apartment complex full of renters who often give zero Fs. The entire neighborhood goes to ass and people move out. The properties are then bought up by flippers and landlords who turn them into even more rentals and the neighborhood is effectively ruined.

All these do gooder idiots can't see the obvious. They are ruining your homes and destroying whatever is left of the middle class' ability to own anything. These idiots are going to end up causing the entire country to turn into nation of renters who Will not be able own anything anymore. All because these morons thought they were doing good by creating "affordable housing". They are falling for the billionaires' crap propaganda because they want to take all land ownership out of the hands of the masses.

Most of those people don't own cars because they cannot afford them, and they live on those certain corridors because there are buses and metro, and they use those to get to work or shop. I am not going to touch your trash comment, because it is on brand to blame "renters" for the ills of society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP.

Some of those opposed seem always to make the mistake of saying YIMBYs are going to tear down detached SFHs as though the policies currently pursued allow them to force that. While some YIMBYs would like that, being terribly against detached SFHs/car-based suburbia, the zoning/etc. policies they've gotten enacted are about allowance for an owner to do something with a property, not forcing them to do that. This sets up an easy retort from YIMBYs along the lines of, "No one is forcing you to tear down your home/move," when the issue really is about all the surroundings of the home in which one lives.

What makes someone want to live in a particular town/neighborhood? It's the characteristics of that town/neighborhood. Some of that has to do with proximity to one's occupation. Some of that has to do with the available services (schools, parks, roads, transit, etc.) and commercial amenities. And some of that has to do with relative crowding and neighborhood appearance.

And that last bit has a lot to do with the policy changes spurred by YIMBYs. It doesn't have to be one's own home that changes to change one's interest in or enjoyment of one's neighborhood/town. And, with moving being a pretty imposing burden, highly economically inefficient from a whole-of-society perspective, a change imposed on sizable populations already living in built-out neighborhoods, like, say Four Corners with the new U Blvd plan on top of the AHSI-related corridor changes, should be far more scrutinized than proposed conditions (zoning, etc.) for the buildout of entire new communities, such as those more recently developed upcouty around Germantown.

What you aren't getting is that people coming up will not be able to afford to live in places that have those desirable characteristics. Think about the ramifications of that statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind all this upzoning is a natural and predictable consequence of mass immigration of low wage workers. You can't have your "No human is illegal" and "Stop ICE" yard signs and not expect this.

The upzoning is to provide homes for these people close enough to you that they can mow your lawns, cook your food and watch your kids. They of course would rather live close to the people that defend and employ them rather than to live out in Waldorf or something and commute in for 2 hours for their low-paying jobs.

So rant on as you like, but you're just getting exactly what you asked for.

Except they never build anything that the cooks, landscapers, and childcare workers can afford.

The infill building is always very expensive housing, whether it’s for rent or purchase.

And then, when a city like DC proposes to build just the very housing you are saying is missing, people like you oppose it.

(see Chevy Chase DC)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep in mind all this upzoning is a natural and predictable consequence of mass immigration of low wage workers. You can't have your "No human is illegal" and "Stop ICE" yard signs and not expect this.

The upzoning is to provide homes for these people close enough to you that they can mow your lawns, cook your food and watch your kids. They of course would rather live close to the people that defend and employ them rather than to live out in Waldorf or something and commute in for 2 hours for their low-paying jobs.

So rant on as you like, but you're just getting exactly what you asked for.

Except they never build anything that the cooks, landscapers, and childcare workers can afford.

The infill building is always very expensive housing, whether it’s for rent or purchase.

And then, when a city like DC proposes to build just the very housing you are saying is missing, people like you oppose it.

(see Chevy Chase DC)

They also oppose the bike lanes, bus lanes, and mass transit (purple line) that these people could use instead of using their precious street parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

The US has been emphasizing SFH since the end of WW2 if not longer. It’s not why there are issues with housing affordability today.

Uh, it actually is.

Uh, it’s actually not. It’s migration patterns where people increasingly have moved to a select group of large metro areas (and increasingly in urban centers instead of exurbs) and the hit to normal housing production patterns following the bursting of the housing bubble and financial crisis that has led to underproducing new units. I’m sure the cult will never tell you that though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

PP here - thank you for answering the question. I have to admit I'm not very well versed on this subject. I always thought/ assumed "missing middle" housing meant houses for the low middle to middle middle class families. So like where I grew up, which was a SFH, but a small one on a small lot. All the families in our neighborhood were working class, or mid-level professionals. Nothing like the mcmansions of today. But it sounds like I'm wrong, and "missing middle" means something else? Cause in my experience I feel like there's plenty of options for singles or couples (apartments/condos), but no where where I can raise a family without being really rich. Every time I see another "mixed use" development going up I get so depressed, because it's always just condos and apartments. But maybe the "American dream" of a house with a little yard and family is just dead?

Don’t let these people fool you. Missing middle is just millennials that want to own a place in a desirable area but can’t afford to. They couldn’t care less about families. They certainly don’t want them in SFHs.

Not quite. Missing middle is a marketing fad. Politicians think it’s middle class housing but it’s really just smaller, expensive housing that boomers buy to rent out or use as a pied-à-terre.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't stand these YIMBY do gooder twerps. They want to raze all SFHs to build dense crap. They love standing on their moral pedestals when they're too stupid to realize they're destroying the middle class and doing the bidding of the billionaires for free. Owning a home is pretty much the ONLY wealth vehicle the middle class has left. But the do gooders want to raze your homes and build giant apartment complexes next to them. Absolutely no one wants to live next to that junk. The middle class will flee, and guess what, developers come in taking all the homes and building a whole bunch of rental crap.

In their infinite wisdom, the YIMBYs and affordable housing idiots are sweeping the last leg of wealth out that is left for the middle class. They ate going to turn the entire counry into permarenters for life. And over time the middle class will be far worse off, because no one will be able to own anything, then they'll still jack up your rents on you in the end. The biggest thing elitists want to control now is land and property ownership. And all these clownshow housing morons are obtaining it for them by ruining your neighborhoods with their amazingly stupid zoning plans.

Not sure if this is bait, but no elected officials seriously want to raze all SFHs in Montgomery County. The AHSI (which I assume you’re referring to) only applies to specific areas within the county near transit corridors. There’s a wealth of literature showing that increasing supply (building more housing) brings down prices. NIMBYs on the council are promoting their exclusionary policies in the name of alleviating economic inequality, and I am not falling for it, nor are many people on the council and perhaps our next executive.

Serious question - how does decreasing the supply of SFH bring down the price of SFH? it seems like it would drive up the price of SFH, while maybe bringing apartment/condo prices (and rent on those properties) down. But most people don't want apartment/condos forever.

The goal is to generally bring down the price of housing, not SFH specifically. Emphasizing SFH is why we are where we are now with respect to housing affordability. We want a broader range of housing options to fit a broader range of salaries and households.

PP here - thank you for answering the question. I have to admit I'm not very well versed on this subject. I always thought/ assumed "missing middle" housing meant houses for the low middle to middle middle class families. So like where I grew up, which was a SFH, but a small one on a small lot. All the families in our neighborhood were working class, or mid-level professionals. Nothing like the mcmansions of today. But it sounds like I'm wrong, and "missing middle" means something else? Cause in my experience I feel like there's plenty of options for singles or couples (apartments/condos), but no where where I can raise a family without being really rich. Every time I see another "mixed use" development going up I get so depressed, because it's always just condos and apartments. But maybe the "American dream" of a house with a little yard and family is just dead?

Don’t let these people fool you. Missing middle is just millennials that want to own a place in a desirable area but can’t afford to. They couldn’t care less about families. They certainly don’t want them in SFHs.

Stop using millennials as the boogeyman. Millennials are in their 40s and late 30s now. Most of the millennials I know have 2-4 kids and own homes. We're on to the next generation getting screwed.

The term didn’t pop up yesterday. It popped up to accommodate people who couldn’t afford to live in the areas they wanted who were, yes, millennials (and I am one).