Wes Moore Wants to Destroy Your Neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.

-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.

-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.

-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?

-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.

This is hogwash. Seriously. Are you gaslighting?

Eliminating SFH zoning means I can build a condo building in any neighborhood I want and the height restrictions - at least as imagined in places like MoCo by our nutty Council - is up to five stories.

It also means I can cram units into one lot and build right up to the lot line.

And all of this while Maryland can’t afford basic maintenance if infrastructure and our schools struggle in MoCo to do basic updates.

As soon as my kids are in college, I’m out of the state. That gives me no joy as a life-long Marylander and a Democratic voter. “Progressives” are the death of us.

You dont understand the law. It does not allow condos where there were once sfh. It allows townhomes.

[Anonymous]

Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.

[Anonymous]

Moore is stating due a second term

Republicans put up COX

COX is anti constitution anti democracy and a good damned liar

Go Moore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.

This is what I am always surprised that people don’t get. People clammer about relaxing zoning to make certain areas more affordable for people that couldn’t otherwise live there. That doesn’t happen. As noted in other posts, wealthy people try to buy up single family homes so they can tear them down and build more densely on the lot and make more money.

The only people who benefit from these changes are builders and wealthy people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.

-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.

-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.

-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?

-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.

My response:
Eliminate SF zoning: A wall of 50 foot tall townhomes would block the sunlight to my yard and home
8 unit/acre density: my neighborhood was designed planned for 1 unit/acre density, roads cannot handle 6-8x traffic and there is no ROW to make roads with 8x density.
Lot coverage limits: This will increase run-off/impervious surfacwes. It will create a higher risk of flooding and water damage for homes in my neighborhood. I have already experienced an increase in flooding from my neighbors home addition, eliminating lot coverage requirements will make this much worse.
Reducing setbacks: Increases the risk of fires spreading from home to home and it will raise home insurance rates. Home insurance companies use the distance from neighboring buildings in their risk models because it increased the risk of wind damage, fire damage, etc.
Setbacks of 5-10ft can also create significant noise pollution issues, when homes have AC units right next to your property line.
Eliminating height limits: people are going to build whatever they are allowed to build a that is economically feasible to build. Yes people will absolutely build 45-50 foot homes on postage stamps lots. This will turn my house into a basement, kill my garden and make it feel like I live in a fishbowl.

The limit is 35 ft high.

It protects people trying to build smaller houses.

No it does not say this. It says notwithstanding any other law, a legislative body may not establish any requirements that directly or indirectly regulate exterior dimensions. That means that height limits for residential zoning will be unenforceable for areas subject to this law. You either did not read this bill or you are lying to reduce opposition to it.

Well, that’s because there is another law called building code that limits it to 35 feet. Ffs!

Yes, the bill does not state everything we already know.

The building limit is so that people can make shorter buildings, not taller buildings.

The building code does not limit height to 35ft zoning does. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes it does.

That is false the height limit for wood frame single family(no sprinkler system) homes is 40ft without fire rated construction and 50 ft with 1 hour fire rated construction. You can easily make a 3 story single family house 40-50 feet tall and the economics will pencil out for developers in MOCO even after considering cost the increase from fire rated construction (under 5% total increase). Developers can recoup cost from 1 hour fire rating by increasing the ratio for total sq footage to foundation size. Wood frame townhouses can be economically built at 4 stories and up to 50 feet in height under existing building codes. A 45 foot tall wall of townhouses 10 ft from my property line will kill my plants, turn my kitchen/living room into a basement and flood my property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.

Exactly. A lot of this “movement” is driven by developers who manipulate the public and well intentioned but not well versed politicians to vote for YIMBY policies. The developers not only make big bucks off of the new homes (vs creating more affordable homes) but they are often getting enormous tax breaks that put the full burden of needed infrastructure and school expansion on the backs of the very same tax payers who can’t afford homes.

Follow the money. In MoCo the drivers of these plans have been developers. Friedson and Glass, have taken money from developer lobbying groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.

-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.

-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.

-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?

-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.

This is hogwash. Seriously. Are you gaslighting?

Eliminating SFH zoning means I can build a condo building in any neighborhood I want and the height restrictions - at least as imagined in places like MoCo by our nutty Council - is up to five stories.

It also means I can cram units into one lot and build right up to the lot line.

And all of this while Maryland can’t afford basic maintenance if infrastructure and our schools struggle in MoCo to do basic updates.

As soon as my kids are in college, I’m out of the state. That gives me no joy as a life-long Marylander and a Democratic voter. “Progressives” are the death of us.

No you can't build a condo in a neighborhood. You can have 8 townhouses but not a condo. There is a height restriction by building codes.

You are bombastic and have no credibility.

Bye Felicia.

It actually does provide a condo loophole for higher density any area subject to SB 36 will also be eligible for HB538 density bonuses as long as it is also a qualified site. So density of up to 11 units per acre is allowed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.

Exactly. A lot of this “movement” is driven by developers who manipulate the public and well intentioned but not well versed politicians to vote for YIMBY policies. The developers not only make big bucks off of the new homes (vs creating more affordable homes) but they are often getting enormous tax breaks that put the full burden of needed infrastructure and school expansion on the backs of the very same tax payers who can’t afford homes.

Follow the money. In MoCo the drivers of these plans have been developers. Friedson and Glass, have taken money from developer lobbying groups.

This bill also allows developers to avoid paying impact fees until they are completely done with the project. This is a very risky policy that will financially ruin localities when a real estate market downturn occurs. If the developer goes bankrupt before they completely finish a development the county will get screwed out of impact fees.

[Anonymous]

This will make Potomac more desirable unless they plan to put apartment buildings next to the multi-million dollar homes. People will pay more for a single family home especially if developers only build apartments and town houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sighhhhhhh

America so desperately thinks they can plan urban design like Japan, but it will be a disaster because America never plans anything right. For starters, the US doesn't have the infrastructure to be designed like Japan. Our public transport sucks ass. Everyone drives everywhere.

All we are going to get are a bunch of neighborhoods that were designed for SFHs now flooded with townhouses, multiplexes and apartments. You are ging to get a million cars parking on the streets, trash problems, and water problems. People are still going to drive everywhere.

Exactly, just like MoCo thinks it can be like Copenhagen by putting a bike lane up in Old Georgetown Road and calling it a day.

The difference is that Denmark and Japan have much smarter and capable populations and don’t do everything half a$$ed. We’ll end up with haphazard planning with increased, mismatched density without the well planned water, road, and transit infrastructure to support it.

We are governed and run by unimpressive people, voted in by an increasingly undereducated populace. That’s a rude thing to say, but it is what it is.

[Anonymous]

All of R-60 and R-90 zoning should allow 1-4 units.

[Anonymous]

Maryland is a fail.

[Anonymous]

Everyone should be emailing their state senator and representatives. This is a huge government overstep. We have local municipalities and county officials who know the specifics of the neighborhoods they represent.

[Anonymous]

I'll be voting republicans next election. Sadly, I realize there are too many communist/socialist/progressives in MD for my vote to make any difference.

As much as I'd like to live here my whole life (I truly do), I think I'll have to move once I have some financial independence.

[Anonymous]

i've yet to see a reasonable answer to why Maryland needs this. Its only so Moore and the far left can virtue signal and get more national attention.

We are one of the worst states in Net Migration AND for business. We are losing billions in tax $ lost, the FBI and Commanders, federal government cuts have hurt, Baltimore looks like a war zone and I'm sure spending billions on illegal immigrants. and on top of all that, all our taxes in EVERY area have increased significantly.

But yet, he wants to force more people to leave but eliminating the one thing that brings stability to this state????

Can anyone give me a good reason for this law and how it helps the state?