Reply to MoCo “Attainable Housing” plan and property values

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "MoCo “Attainable Housing” plan and property values"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So people know what is going on re: attainable housing, here is what the Town of Chevy Chase Council emailed town residents a few days ago.  
[i]
However, it is crucial for residents to share their thoughts and engage on this issue now.

Under prospective County regulations, several possibilities exist for how a Town lot could be redeveloped to accommodate multifamily housing:

-- Duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes could be built by-right on Town lots.

-- 3-4 story stacked flats, apartment buildings up to 19 units, and townhouses could be built on Town lots located within 500 feet of Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues with public input.

In addition, because the County intends to designate the Town as a multifamily residential zone, a newly enacted State housing law may allow density bonuses and mixed-use (e.g., restaurant, retail, recreation, office) components in these projects. This would result in larger structures and different uses on Town lots, potentially regardless of Town building regulations. For example,

-- A small-scale 6,000 square foot duplex that includes an affordable unit may become a 10,140 square foot development that could include a mixed-use component by right and without public input.

-- A medium-scale 15,000 square foot apartment building with at least 15% affordable housing units may increase to a 25,350 square foot development after accounting for County and State density bonuses. These developments would be subject to public input.

The Town will provide more information on the County's housing proposals as it becomes available.

In the meantime, you may send an email to all County Councilmembers here.

Also, we encourage you to attend Council President Friedson’s Community Conversation tomorrow evening (Wednesday, July 24 from 7 to 8:30 p.m.) to ask questions and provide comments about these proposals. [/i]

As people are discussing setbacks, parking, etc. it's important to understand the scope of this plan and how it will change many existing neighborhoods int the county, and not just close-in neighborhoods.   [/quote]

The Council has lost its mind! [/quote]

The Council knows exactly what it is doing.  Fani-Gonzalez was on a prior Planning Board.  Jawondo had put forth Zoning Text Amendments as a means of end-arounding the more typical zoning change/exception processes.  Friedson set the table for Planning's delivery of the report in June, noting large changes were in play and claiming the need to have them.  That interleaved perfectly with Planning's introductory comments (including the straw man of "nobody is forcing you to turn your home into an apartment") when laying out the breathtakingly large scope of the proposal, strikingly different in depth and breadth from those ideas previously suggested while the public had a chance to review/provide input in a meaningful way.

The Council placed Harris and others on the Planning Board with clear intent to push this to the maximal extent possible when they threw out the old board.  That prior board was no foe of development, but this one is more clearly pushing much more, and at a quicker pace.  Planning takes its direction from the board, and, consequently, has not worked toward alternatives to compare/consider potential effect, much less to place in front of the Council.

The Council and Board want this to be the only game in town.  They couch it in the thought of its just being one of several upcoming policy initiatives towards densification/additional housing. They start with this, though, rushing to get it done before opposition might have a chance to set up or weigh in at the ballot box, knowing that it would be the biggest fight.  Meanwhile, they dismiss related concerns with straw man arguments and hand waiving about far future (and rather uncertain, if not definitively unlikely) action in separate processes.[/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