Why do they allow all the tear downs in Bethesda?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In Bethesda this monster houses are a hot mess. Legally you can build a huge box and annoy your neighbors.

But for most part like buying a rare work of art and letting your five year old draw on it with crayons and then being suprised no one likes it. Legally it's your right.

Other thing I noted is front lawns are disappearing as well as parents in Bethesda. The new houses eat up whole property.

If you drive in section behind Wisconsin and Eastwest highway in morning behind Catholic Church I see McMansion constructions and sidewalks blocked off. Kids standing in street waiting for bus with "the help" chatting with each other and few actual parents frazzled watching whole mess

Once more, this time in English, please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Well, if you have a house that's built almost entirely over the lot (which many of these McMansions do), it reduces privacy for all involved because your neighbor is literally on top of you. Plus it looks ugly. McMansions are often taller which changes the character of the neighborhood. McMansions shouldn't be on 5.5K lots. It's just disproportionate and ugly.

Lobby the county to change the yard setbacks. New houses have to have permits. If construction is permitted, then yard setbacks are as required.

Yard setbacks, at least in Montgomery County, are averages. That is, you can have a porch jutting out into the border of your property and if the rest of the house is further back, MoCo DPS considers that fine. But the end result is that the new McMansion is now right on top of your backyard, fishbowl style. It's easy to say "lobby the county" but these things are not easy to change and are not likely to change given the influence of developers and their campaign contribution.

Then live with it. The agency that governs the setbacks is the county's permitting office, not any one person's individual taste.

This, exactly. A shorter version of this conversation:

Person A: "I really don't like the new houses, they're too big and ugly!"
Person B: "Well, they're permitted by the current zoning laws, so if you really want to do something about them, you need to lobby the county to change those laws."
Person A: "But it's too hard to change the county laws! I want people to stop because I say so. I also would really like it if people ran their aesthetic decisions by me, so I can approve them beforehand."
Person B: [Shrugs and goes to check on toddler, who displays more rational thought processes than Person A.]

What a gross oversimplification. People aren't complaining about McMansions because they are big and ugly. They're complaining because the McMansions can have an adverse effect on their property. As others have mentioned upthread, swapping a tiny 1200 square foot footprint house with a 50 square foot setback to a 5000 square foot house with an average of a 20 foot setback can really limit privacy for both parties. You're literally living on top of someone--might as well put in taller townhouses which are more space efficient than have a 5000 square foot plus McMansion which is just environmentally unsound unless you have 6 kids. Also, when people remove most of the lawn/trees/backyard from a lot to make room for the new house footprint, the soil/trees aren't there to absorb water. Many of my neighbors have suffered from drainage plans approved by DPS that aren't adequate for the new size of the McMansion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Well, if you have a house that's built almost entirely over the lot (which many of these McMansions do), it reduces privacy for all involved because your neighbor is literally on top of you. Plus it looks ugly. McMansions are often taller which changes the character of the neighborhood. McMansions shouldn't be on 5.5K lots. It's just disproportionate and ugly.

Lobby the county to change the yard setbacks. New houses have to have permits. If construction is permitted, then yard setbacks are as required.

Yard setbacks, at least in Montgomery County, are averages. That is, you can have a porch jutting out into the border of your property and if the rest of the house is further back, MoCo DPS considers that fine. But the end result is that the new McMansion is now right on top of your backyard, fishbowl style. It's easy to say "lobby the county" but these things are not easy to change and are not likely to change given the influence of developers and their campaign contribution.

Then live with it. The agency that governs the setbacks is the county's permitting office, not any one person's individual taste.

This, exactly. A shorter version of this conversation:

Person A: "I really don't like the new houses, they're too big and ugly!"
Person B: "Well, they're permitted by the current zoning laws, so if you really want to do something about them, you need to lobby the county to change those laws."
Person A: "But it's too hard to change the county laws! I want people to stop because I say so. I also would really like it if people ran their aesthetic decisions by me, so I can approve them beforehand."
Person B: [Shrugs and goes to check on toddler, who displays more rational thought processes than Person A.]

What a gross oversimplification. People aren't complaining about McMansions because they are big and ugly. They're complaining because the McMansions can have an adverse effect on their property. As others have mentioned upthread, swapping a tiny 1200 square foot footprint house with a 50 square foot setback to a 5000 square foot house with an average of a 20 foot setback can really limit privacy for both parties. You're literally living on top of someone--might as well put in taller townhouses which are more space efficient than have a 5000 square foot plus McMansion which is just environmentally unsound unless you have 6 kids. Also, when people remove most of the lawn/trees/backyard from a lot to make room for the new house footprint, the soil/trees aren't there to absorb water. Many of my neighbors have suffered from drainage plans approved by DPS that aren't adequate for the new size of the McMansion.

so what do you want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Well, if you have a house that's built almost entirely over the lot (which many of these McMansions do), it reduces privacy for all involved because your neighbor is literally on top of you. Plus it looks ugly. McMansions are often taller which changes the character of the neighborhood. McMansions shouldn't be on 5.5K lots. It's just disproportionate and ugly.

Lobby the county to change the yard setbacks. New houses have to have permits. If construction is permitted, then yard setbacks are as required.

Yard setbacks, at least in Montgomery County, are averages. That is, you can have a porch jutting out into the border of your property and if the rest of the house is further back, MoCo DPS considers that fine. But the end result is that the new McMansion is now right on top of your backyard, fishbowl style. It's easy to say "lobby the county" but these things are not easy to change and are not likely to change given the influence of developers and their campaign contribution.

Then live with it. The agency that governs the setbacks is the county's permitting office, not any one person's individual taste.

This, exactly. A shorter version of this conversation:

Person A: "I really don't like the new houses, they're too big and ugly!"
Person B: "Well, they're permitted by the current zoning laws, so if you really want to do something about them, you need to lobby the county to change those laws."
Person A: "But it's too hard to change the county laws! I want people to stop because I say so. I also would really like it if people ran their aesthetic decisions by me, so I can approve them beforehand."
Person B: [Shrugs and goes to check on toddler, who displays more rational thought processes than Person A.]

What a gross oversimplification. People aren't complaining about McMansions because they are big and ugly. They're complaining because the McMansions can have an adverse effect on their property. As others have mentioned upthread, swapping a tiny 1200 square foot footprint house with a 50 square foot setback to a 5000 square foot house with an average of a 20 foot setback can really limit privacy for both parties. You're literally living on top of someone--might as well put in taller townhouses which are more space efficient than have a 5000 square foot plus McMansion which is just environmentally unsound unless you have 6 kids. Also, when people remove most of the lawn/trees/backyard from a lot to make room for the new house footprint, the soil/trees aren't there to absorb water. Many of my neighbors have suffered from drainage plans approved by DPS that aren't adequate for the new size of the McMansion.

so what do you want?

Minimum setback requirements (rather than these average setbacks) which really can put part of someone's home right on top of someone else's backyard in an obnoxious way. And more importantly, no adverse effects on neighboring properties. It isn't right that my neighbors have had to have spent thousands of dollars redoing their drainage after decades of living in a house because someone tears down an old house and takes out all the trees and lawn so that stormwater flows much more into someone's yard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

address says Bethesda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is the “they” in your question? Bethesda is just a geographic area. There is no Bethesda government. Some neighborhoods do have covenants that prohibit tear downs. But the housing stock is pretty old. Some of these houses need to be torn down.

"They" is MoCo government.

"They" have the power to impose housing regulations.

For the most part, they do not.

Hence: Teardowns, McMansions, and socioeconomic segregation.

RE old housing stock needing to be torn down, those who live in charming towns and villages in e.g. New England would beg to differ.

MoCo would either have to declare the area a historic district, or downzone the parcels to limit FAR, change setbacks, etc (since existing zoning allows mcmansion sized houses). The latter, IIUC, would require monetary compensation for lost value, and MoCo is just not going to spend money that way (and few other local jurisdictions would). An historic district would limit lots of things homeowners want to do with their houses, and is unlikely even if a case could be made for the area being historic.

The other way to prevent Mcmansions, paradoxically, would be to UPZONE to allow townhomes, which in a place close to metro would likely pencil out better for developers than Mcmansions do Iand better at countering SES segregation, put more households close to transit, etc) , but AFAICT the very neighbors who don't like the mcmansions, often do not like TH's either.

McMansions are going to be totally useless for the next generation - even if millennials had millions of extra dollars they most likely would NOT want to live in one of those huge, energy and time sucking (howcdo you clean that??) monstrosities. What they should be building are duplexes. And not McMansion sized duplexes but something reasonably sized - people live in houses to have a yard for the kids and the dog to play in and, yes, a tomato garden.

Your Freudian slip got it right the first time. Stop being such a baby and go live in Wheaton.

Ha ha you’re so funny & smart!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

address says Bethesda

And Montgomery mall is in "Bethesda" I mean The blocks surrounding Bethesda Metro by East West Highway and Wisconsin. Plots are small, streets narrow and lots of traffic. This McMansions are on 60 by 100 plots.

[Anonymous]

I love the post-WW2 aesthetic that the original homes had. It's really a shame they are replaced with these monstrosities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county LOVES these hideous monstrosities as the county does get more in taxes. Bethesda gets nothing but reduced quality of life.

Also benefitting - local realtors and builders getting rich off of these high priced sales and pocketing it all. Other Nethesda residents , again, get nothing but a reduced quality of life.

Now when people, especially older residents, are looking for a small house there aren’t any because the builders have bought them all.

Please explain how a larger house on your street gives you a "reduced quality of life."

Well, if you have a house that's built almost entirely over the lot (which many of these McMansions do), it reduces privacy for all involved because your neighbor is literally on top of you. Plus it looks ugly. McMansions are often taller which changes the character of the neighborhood. McMansions shouldn't be on 5.5K lots. It's just disproportionate and ugly.

Lobby the county to change the yard setbacks. New houses have to have permits. If construction is permitted, then yard setbacks are as required.

Yard setbacks, at least in Montgomery County, are averages. That is, you can have a porch jutting out into the border of your property and if the rest of the house is further back, MoCo DPS considers that fine. But the end result is that the new McMansion is now right on top of your backyard, fishbowl style. It's easy to say "lobby the county" but these things are not easy to change and are not likely to change given the influence of developers and their campaign contribution.

Then live with it. The agency that governs the setbacks is the county's permitting office, not any one person's individual taste.

This, exactly. A shorter version of this conversation:

Person A: "I really don't like the new houses, they're too big and ugly!"
Person B: "Well, they're permitted by the current zoning laws, so if you really want to do something about them, you need to lobby the county to change those laws."
Person A: "But it's too hard to change the county laws! I want people to stop because I say so. I also would really like it if people ran their aesthetic decisions by me, so I can approve them beforehand."
Person B: [Shrugs and goes to check on toddler, who displays more rational thought processes than Person A.]

What a gross oversimplification. People aren't complaining about McMansions because they are big and ugly. They're complaining because the McMansions can have an adverse effect on their property. As others have mentioned upthread, swapping a tiny 1200 square foot footprint house with a 50 square foot setback to a 5000 square foot house with an average of a 20 foot setback can really limit privacy for both parties. You're literally living on top of someone--might as well put in taller townhouses which are more space efficient than have a 5000 square foot plus McMansion which is just environmentally unsound unless you have 6 kids. Also, when people remove most of the lawn/trees/backyard from a lot to make room for the new house footprint, the soil/trees aren't there to absorb water. Many of my neighbors have suffered from drainage plans approved by DPS that aren't adequate for the new size of the McMansion.

so what do you want?

Minimum setback requirements (rather than these average setbacks) which really can put part of someone's home right on top of someone else's backyard in an obnoxious way. And more importantly, no adverse effects on neighboring properties. It isn't right that my neighbors have had to have spent thousands of dollars redoing their drainage after decades of living in a house because someone tears down an old house and takes out all the trees and lawn so that stormwater flows much more into someone's yard.

So you want:
(i) setback requirements changed => zoning changes => see prior comment.
(ii) Minimizing impact on other neighbors is fine, and there are provisions regarding drainage in the code now. Your issue isn't that they don't exist, it's that you don't believe they are stringent enough. Which is fine, I suppose (and suggests, yet again, that you should try to have the zoning code amended). But, you're being completely unrealistic. You appear to think that because neighbor A has put a drainage plan in place, Neighbor B is precluded from making any improvements on her property that would require any change in that plan. No change in the footprint of the house, no change in the amount of grass, etc. That is, frankly, ridiculous. Neighborhoods are not encased in amber, and you don't get that kind of control over your neighbors. But, by all means, if you'd like to waste your time tilting at that particular windmill, be my guest.

And, for the record, numerous people on this thread have complained about McMansions solely because they are big and ugly. Also, the word you are looking for is figuratively, not literally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love the post-WW2 aesthetic that the original homes had. It's really a shame they are replaced with these monstrosities.

Hey, look - someone complaining about McMansions based solely on how they look!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

You are not helping your cause when your additional arguments that people shouldn't be able to improve their homes are because you don't like construction in your neighborhood, or construction workers (People drinking coffee! The horror!). Perhaps a house on more land would better suit your sensibilities, rather than trying to dictate to your neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

You are not helping your cause when your additional arguments that people shouldn't be able to improve their homes are because you don't like construction in your neighborhood, or construction workers (People drinking coffee! The horror!). Perhaps a house on more land would better suit your sensibilities, rather than trying to dictate to your neighbors.

I hardly call several illegally double park trucks and worker cars up and down block gabbing on phones, smoking, drinking coffe and eating breakfast every morning at seven am by bedroom window for one year not a big deal.

I moved from Bethesda a few months ago and my neighbor across steeet did same. Funny we both ended up same block in Potomac. Potomac is so crowded no one wants to live there anymore. I work in Bethesda and I literally have to keep track of the McMansions blocking traffic.

And my neighbors on Berhesda don't build McMansions. It is mainly people who don't live there or builders who buy the houses. Bethesda should incorporate and get there own building dept.

One town I know had this issue passed law no commercial vehicles allowed to park or even stand on street. They ticket the crap out of McMansion builders till they disappears. Also no commercial vehicles in driveways.

The builders called a truce with town and reallowed to build at a more normal pace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

Hmm. I've lived two blocks from that house for 16 years; didn't realize I don't live in "real Bethesda." Not all lots in Bethesda are 6,000 square feet; ours is 14,000 square feet.

And yes, I live in "real Bethesda" in a large house, on a large (for "real Bethesda") lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP go protest in front of this house and save it:

https://www.redfin.com/MD/Bethesda/7714-Radnor-Rd-20817/home/10646496

That house above is not in real Bethesda, and is on a large plot. The houses on places like Chase and Pearl streets with tiny and narrow plots the McMansions encroach on neighbors. Also no room for trucks, deliveries to pull into property, dumpsters, work trucks, workers meeting every morning on sidewalks parked illegal, smoking, drinking coffee at crack of dawn not fun as some houses this goes on for 1-2 years.

Hmm. I've lived two blocks from that house for 16 years; didn't realize I don't live in "real Bethesda." Not all lots in Bethesda are 6,000 square feet; ours is 14,000 square feet.

And yes, I live in "real Bethesda" in a large house, on a large (for "real Bethesda") lot.

Real Bethesda walking distance to metro