MD Beltway Widening..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And where in the DC metro region are those places where you can fit a few hundred thousand more people? Assuming that with 2M more people, that about 10-20% of them will live inside the beltway, where are you going to fit 200-400K additional people? And where outside the beltway will you fit the addition 1.6M-1.8M additional people where they don't have to drive long distances to get to work?

It's nice to have this fantasy of a non-urban sprawled area, but DC doesn't build up like many of the other major metropolitan areas, so you have a limit to the density that you can attain. And inside the beltway is already pretty dense. There isn't a lot of undiscovered territory where you can add buildings, so you are forced to convert single family or minimal family housing to multi-family housing. And there's a limit to how much housing you can create that way.

You are deluding yourself if you think that this metro area can continue to adapt for the growing population with only adding mass transit over the next 10 years. If you don't add highways and only add mass transit the average commute time for those people who cannot use mass transit will be over 2 hours each way. Fortunately, there are others who understand this issue. Yes, when you add the highways, it will not shorten commute times, but as the population grows, the commute times will not grow much longer than they already are.

You could fit them just into DC. The population of DC used to be a few hundred thousand people higher than it is now.

Also, inside the Beltway is not already pretty dense. Most of the county is zoned to allow only single-family-detached housing. We need to change that.

But yes, you're right, land use needs to be part of the discussion. 270 is jammed with people who moved to Frederick County (for example, Urbana) and now want the state to spend a lot of money to make it easier for them to drive long distances for work. It's a disaster for the region, and also for the global climate.

Not true. Montgomery County is zoned for multi-family housing throughout the county. You need to keep up with the news.

No, being allowed to build a detached accessory dwelling unit under certain conditions does not count as multi-family zoning.

In Montgomery County, 35% of the land area is zoned for agriculture or open space, and 48% is zoned for detached single-family housing. That leaves 18% of the land area for everything else.

What is with the disinformation campaign? The council changed zoning throughout the county recently. Detached accessory dwelling units are mulit-family zoning. The owner needs to live in the main house. They do not need to be related to the people living in the backyard house.

I think we need to differentiate between an in law apartment in your basement/backyard and a highrise rental community (most people's definition of multifamily zoning)

[Anonymous]

The poster who wants to keep asserting that there should be no single family houses inside the Beltway needs to understand the life cycle of those neighborhoods. They were in decline, some of us bought older homes with significant deferred maintenance and fixed them up. Now, 20 years later, they are desirable again (thanks for our hard work) and we get to hear about how it's a waste of resources and everything needs to move to new apartment builds. That way of thinking is what brought us the Trump Administration. The notion that if you work hard and have anything nice that you have more than your fair share is a notion that's become tiresome. But it's being sold to us by our idiot county council and by some of their shills on this board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What is with the disinformation campaign? The council changed zoning throughout the county recently. Detached accessory dwelling units are mulit-family zoning. The owner needs to live in the main house. They do not need to be related to the people living in the backyard house.

No, they're not.

Here's the zoning map: https://mcatlas.org/zoning/

Here's the zoning code: http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=amlegal:montgomeryco_md_mc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poster who wants to keep asserting that there should be no single family houses inside the Beltway needs to understand the life cycle of those neighborhoods. They were in decline, some of us bought older homes with significant deferred maintenance and fixed them up. Now, 20 years later, they are desirable again (thanks for our hard work) and we get to hear about how it's a waste of resources and everything needs to move to new apartment builds. That way of thinking is what brought us the Trump Administration. The notion that if you work hard and have anything nice that you have more than your fair share is a notion that's become tiresome. But it's being sold to us by our idiot county council and by some of their shills on this board.

Nobody is proposing to take away your single-family detached house.

Single-family-detached houses inside the Beltway are great for the people who own them. If you own one, hooray for you!

Forbidding anything to be built in most areas inside the Beltway except single-family-detached houses is not so great, though. And that's what needs to change. Property owners should be allowed to build a duplex, or a fourplex, on a property that is currently zoned for a single-family-detached house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster who wants to keep asserting that there should be no single family houses inside the Beltway needs to understand the life cycle of those neighborhoods. They were in decline, some of us bought older homes with significant deferred maintenance and fixed them up. Now, 20 years later, they are desirable again (thanks for our hard work) and we get to hear about how it's a waste of resources and everything needs to move to new apartment builds. That way of thinking is what brought us the Trump Administration. The notion that if you work hard and have anything nice that you have more than your fair share is a notion that's become tiresome. But it's being sold to us by our idiot county council and by some of their shills on this board.

Nobody is proposing to take away your single-family detached house.

Single-family-detached houses inside the Beltway are great for the people who own them. If you own one, hooray for you!

Forbidding anything to be built in most areas inside the Beltway except single-family-detached houses is not so great, though. And that's what needs to change. Property owners should be allowed to build a duplex, or a fourplex, on a property that is currently zoned for a single-family-detached house.

Why should they be allowed to do that? That would look like crap. You want to do that, then move to Takoma or some other municipality and get your town to arrange it for you. We have loads of apartments mixed in with our single family homes and that's enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster who wants to keep asserting that there should be no single family houses inside the Beltway needs to understand the life cycle of those neighborhoods. They were in decline, some of us bought older homes with significant deferred maintenance and fixed them up. Now, 20 years later, they are desirable again (thanks for our hard work) and we get to hear about how it's a waste of resources and everything needs to move to new apartment builds. That way of thinking is what brought us the Trump Administration. The notion that if you work hard and have anything nice that you have more than your fair share is a notion that's become tiresome. But it's being sold to us by our idiot county council and by some of their shills on this board.

Nobody is proposing to take away your single-family detached house.

Single-family-detached houses inside the Beltway are great for the people who own them. If you own one, hooray for you!

Forbidding anything to be built in most areas inside the Beltway except single-family-detached houses is not so great, though. And that's what needs to change. Property owners should be allowed to build a duplex, or a fourplex, on a property that is currently zoned for a single-family-detached house.

Why should they be allowed to do that? That would look like crap. You want to do that, then move to Takoma or some other municipality and get your town to arrange it for you. We have loads of apartments mixed in with our single family homes and that's enough.

Because they own the property, and you don't.

And because there's demand for more housing units close in.

And because it makes sense for society in a whole lot of different ways to allow more housing units close in.

And because nothing bad is going to happen to people who live in detached single-family houses, if we have neighbors who live in duplexes or three-unit or four-unit buildings. It's not an infectious disease.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The poster who wants to keep asserting that there should be no single family houses inside the Beltway needs to understand the life cycle of those neighborhoods. They were in decline, some of us bought older homes with significant deferred maintenance and fixed them up. Now, 20 years later, they are desirable again (thanks for our hard work) and we get to hear about how it's a waste of resources and everything needs to move to new apartment builds. That way of thinking is what brought us the Trump Administration. The notion that if you work hard and have anything nice that you have more than your fair share is a notion that's become tiresome. But it's being sold to us by our idiot county council and by some of their shills on this board.

Nobody is proposing to take away your single-family detached house.

Single-family-detached houses inside the Beltway are great for the people who own them. If you own one, hooray for you!

Forbidding anything to be built in most areas inside the Beltway except single-family-detached houses is not so great, though. And that's what needs to change. Property owners should be allowed to build a duplex, or a fourplex, on a property that is currently zoned for a single-family-detached house.

Why should they be allowed to do that? That would look like crap. You want to do that, then move to Takoma or some other municipality and get your town to arrange it for you. We have loads of apartments mixed in with our single family homes and that's enough.

Because they own the property, and you don't.

And because there's demand for more housing units close in.

And because it makes sense for society in a whole lot of different ways to allow more housing units close in.

And because nothing bad is going to happen to people who live in detached single-family houses, if we have neighbors who live in duplexes or three-unit or four-unit buildings. It's not an infectious disease.

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

If Riemer gets the zoning even more jacked than it already is, and if at any time he decides we will have duplexes where there are now SFHs, I will take my high salary, low demand for resources self and move to another jurisdiction. I will not pay high taxes to put up with that bull$h*t, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

If Riemer gets the zoning even more jacked than it already is, and if at any time he decides we will have duplexes where there are now SFHs, I will take my high salary, low demand for resources self and move to another jurisdiction. I will not pay high taxes to put up with that bull$h*t, sorry.

If you want to move because you can't stand the possibility that a neighboring property owner might replace a single house with a duplex, then move - I guess? It's your choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

If Riemer gets the zoning even more jacked than it already is, and if at any time he decides we will have duplexes where there are now SFHs, I will take my high salary, low demand for resources self and move to another jurisdiction. I will not pay high taxes to put up with that bull$h*t, sorry.

If you want to move because you can't stand the possibility that a neighboring property owner might replace a single house with a duplex, then move - I guess? It's your choice.

What's your motivation for supporting such an idiotic idea? It's not altruism, so what is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

If Riemer gets the zoning even more jacked than it already is, and if at any time he decides we will have duplexes where there are now SFHs, I will take my high salary, low demand for resources self and move to another jurisdiction. I will not pay high taxes to put up with that bull$h*t, sorry.

If you want to move because you can't stand the possibility that a neighboring property owner might replace a single house with a duplex, then move - I guess? It's your choice.

What's your motivation for supporting such an idiotic idea? It's not altruism, so what is it?

I'm not the PP but I support it because we need more housing and single family homes are a very inefficient use of land. There is so much stupid fear mongering on this issue - no one is outlawing single family homes or requiring anyone to convert theirs and in most cases the form based part of the code is unchanged from what is on the books so at worst you'd get a duplex build under the same restrictions as a single family home (lot occupancy, set backs, height etc) and might not even be able to tell the difference.

And if you own a home in a desirable area the value of your lot just increased.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP commenting that the population is going to grow by 20%, where did you get your data? Please provide a link to your numbers.

Some of the articles I found last time. It's late, and I just got back from a work event all weekend. I'll try to find more tomorrow:
https://www.washingtonian.com/2015/01/22/washington-area-population-expected-to-increase-by-more-than-2-million-by-2030/
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/33921/2000065-Scenarios-for-Regional-Growth-from-2010-to-2030.pdf

This one has a more modest 18% growth rate projected (7.35M in 2030 vs 6.2M today)
http://proximityone.com/cbsa/1/cbsa47900.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have zoning for a reason. You can't build a shopping mall in my cul-de-sac of SFHs, nor open up an auto repair shop.

What reason?

Nobody is talking about building shopping malls or auto repair shops in your cul-de-sac. And nobody is proposing to get rid of zoning, either. The idea is to change the zoning to allow a one-family or two-family house (i.e., a duplex), instead of exclusively a one-family house.

If Riemer gets the zoning even more jacked than it already is, and if at any time he decides we will have duplexes where there are now SFHs, I will take my high salary, low demand for resources self and move to another jurisdiction. I will not pay high taxes to put up with that bull$h*t, sorry.

If you want to move because you can't stand the possibility that a neighboring property owner might replace a single house with a duplex, then move - I guess? It's your choice.

What's your motivation for supporting such an idiotic idea? It's not altruism, so what is it?

What's an idiotic idea? Allowing duplexes, or moving because of the possibility that you might live next to a duplex?

[Anonymous]

Instead of widening the beltway and destroying homes in the process and spending $$$$ tons of money. Why not just extend the ICC across the Potomac and connect it with Rt. 28 in NoVa which has recently been widened and converted to an expressway? It would do several things, give us an alternate Potomac crossing and would cause less disruption as that section of MoCo is largely rural so less homes would be demolished. If people are concerned about sprawl limit the amount of the exits (or ban them altogether from I-270 until you cross into NoVa) and continue to restrict development in that area which is part of the Agricultural Reserve. Make it a variable toll road based on congestion to recoup the money for construction and maintenance and allow carpools and buses to use it for free (with an EZPass Flex) to give people an incentive to carpool.

I bet this would be a popular route as it would give people in Frederick, Northern MoCo/Southern HoCo, and PG County easier access to the job rich Dulles Tech Corridor and also give people working there access to more affordable housing areas. It would take pressure off the American Legion and Point of Rocks bridges. I support transit and denser development around transit stations but understand not everyone will be able to give up their cars. It would make it easier to get around and through our region, as we have a lot of traffic going through.