Reply to MOCO - County Wide Upzoning, Everywhere

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "MOCO - County Wide Upzoning, Everywhere"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Either the cost of living in one of the units in the multi-unit residential building (two-unit, three-unit, four-unit) will be less than the cost of living in a single-unit residential building - i.e., it will be more affordable - and the residents will be "takers".

Or the cost of living in one of those units will not be less than the cost of living in a single-unit residential building - i.e., it will not be more affordable - in which case the residents will be "makers".

But what people seem to be arguing is both: the multi-unit housing cost will not be more affordable, AND the residents will be "takers". Pick one.

I'm using this Ayn Rand "takers"/"makers" thinking purely for the sake of argument. My personal opinion is that this thinking is trash, economically, socially, and morally.[/quote]

Having worked for Montgomery County DHHS for almost 10 years, I am willing to bet the people these multi dwelling units will attract will 100% be takers. They will be an economic net negative. [/quote]

In other words, according to you, the rezoning proposal will result in more affordable housing. Great!

Although your opinion is much like a podiatrist explaining that, in their experience, everyone has foot problems.[/quote]

Fewer SFHs in MC means fewer wealthy people in MC.  Fewer wealthy residents mean fewer tax dollars that pay for the social services.  This is not an Ayn Rand mentality.  People who need social services need social services.  But someone has to pay the taxes that pay for those services.  The net payors are not likely to be residents of these multi-unit dwellings.  Reducing the number of SFHs is counter-productive from a fiscal standpoint. [b] And a focus on upzoning is particularly stupid given the quantity of underutilized commercial property in MC, especially along Rockville Pike and Georgia Avenue.[/b]  Latter are both also convenient to roads and public transport.
[/quote]

As far as I know, all or almost all of that land is already zoned C/R. If any of it is not yet zoned C/R, I would support rezoning to C/R. What do you propose to encourage those property owners to redevelop their commercial use to commercial/residential use?[/quote]

The county has to make it more attractive to redevelop those properties than tear down existing SFHs.  They give breaks to developers all the time.

I agree that there are some real eyesore stretches of Georgia and Rockville pike that at the same time have so much potential due to the public transport options.[/quote]

The developers who redevelop the commercial properties are big developers like JBG or Saul or Pulte. I doubt they will be interested in tiny projects to replace a one-unit building with a four-unit building. I doubt even a medium-big developer like EYA will be interested.

But really, why not both? Not everyone in the buying or renting market for a unit in a multi-unit building wants a unit in a large multi-unit building right on a large road with lots of cars. Some people want a unit in a small multi-unit building on a quiet street with few cars. Why shouldn't that be an option, too?[/quote]

Ah that’s the rub though- if you convert SFHs on a currently quiet street to multi unit buildings, the cars and noise increase.

It’s pretty much impossible to have everything you want in this area unless you are wealthy.  I can’t afford to live in Bethesda and that’s ok.[/quote]

No, that's not a rub. That's just the same old idea that multi-unit housing contaminates single-unit housing. It is 100% possible to build a duplex in an area that is currently exclusively uniplexes.[/quote]

It’s possible, but as PP said it will now change the atmosphere of the neighborhood. Your quiet street is no longer quiet.

I like PP’s last line. I couldn’t afford to live in Bethesda when we moved here, and that’s why we live in Silver Spring. And that’s ok. I don’t think it is my right to buy a house anywhere I please.  You buy what and where you can afford. [/quote]

Please explain how you get from "I don't think it is my right to buy a house anywhere I please." to "And so therefore, county law should continue to make it illegal for property owners to build multi-unit housing in large parts of the county."?

Also, have you ever been a renter?[/quote]

We rented for 3 years before we bought our house. 
[b]I think places zoned for multi unit housing should get more multi unit housing. I think neighborhoods with single family homes should stay single family homes. [/b]I’m not sure where you’re seeing a disconnect. [/quote]

Why?[/quote]

Because single family home neighborhoods are generally quieter and don’t feel crowded. I like dealing with less people, not more. Thats why I bought my house where I did. I did 3 years of apartment living and that was enough for me. 
Is that ok with you?[/quote]

You think areas with exclusively single-unit housing should remain exclusively single-unit housing because you prefer living in a neighborhood with exclusively single-unit housing.[/quote]

Are you really not understanding what I wrote?[/quote]

No. Please explain.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics