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]I frequently hear that missing middle housing is designed with teachers, nurses, police officers, and firefighters in mind.

As a teacher, I can tell you that in general, we don’t take the bus to get to work. A few, yes, but probably 98% do not because we bring work home regularly. Police officers, nurses, and firefighters have crazy work hours. They will drive to work as well.[/quote]

There's fewer people taking the bus today than there were 20 years ago. Use of all forms of public transportation crashed after the pandemic, even after accounting for remote work. Driving has gotten a lot more popular. [/quote]

Are you saying that mode share has shifted in favor of driving? Do you have any data for that? Bus service post-covid is also worse, of course. If the point you're making is that inadequate bus service is not popular, I won't argue. Bus riders will be the first to tell you about that, in detail, because they actually ride the bus. However, I think the conclusion to draw from this is that we need better bus service.

Now could you please explain how this relates to the zoning proposals?[/quote]

DP.

Sure.  Shouldn't the planning board and county council be focused on workable initiatives to make the lives of the residents they represent better?

[b]The increased density in detached SFH neighborhood initiatve is dependent on bus, among many other things. [/b] Yet there is not adequate bus service, existing or as planned, to support increased density making things better for current residents.

Just like most of the infrastructure that would be necessary.  Yet they do not propose tying increased density to achieving adequate infrastructure.[/quote]

Why do you say that? I don't think it's dependent on the bus.[/quote]

[background conversation among, generally. YIMBYs & NIMBYs]

YIMBY: Let's increase density in existing detached SFH neighborhoods, moreso close in where BRT corridors and Metro start to converge.  There isn't enough housing there for those who want to live in those locations.

NIMBY: I don't want the added burdens in my neighborhood that come with what you are proposing.  [Gives laundry list, including increased local vehicle traffic and cramped street parking with the proposed zoning allowing fewer on-site parkong spaces per unit].

YIMBY: That's OK, the new residents are going to take advantage of the bus, especially the BRT along those corridors.

NIMBY: Not enough of them will, and probably not very many at all.  Folks tend to take the most convenient form of transportation, and that tends to be cars for many reasons.

YIMBY: You are being classist [phrases such responses to hint at racist, too].

[a whole lot of unproductive yes/no responses]

TEACHER: [starting new post vs. a direct reply] We, and other public servants who are among the classes that the density appears to be proposed for, don't tend to take the bus.

[NIMBY throws in more of same]

YIMBY: Sure, bus is inadequate and therefore unpopular.  [i]How does this relate to the increased density proposal?[/i]

:roll:

DP: The proposed change depends on bus, but bus and other infrastructure won't be adequate to support it.

YIMBY: [i]"Why do you say that? I don't think it's dependent on the bus."[/i]

:roll:  :roll:

The report that Montgomery Planning put to the County Council on this has bus/BRT as a support.  They've used public transit in the past as a support to permit lower parking minimums.  They've discussed the same in public meetings on the current initiative.[/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