Reply to There is no housing crisis in MoCo or most of the DMV for that matter

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "There is no housing crisis in MoCo or most of the DMV for that matter "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]And here we have the same folks who can't have a reasoned discussion on a similar thread come back to dig up this one to try to keep at top of mind a justification for increased "missing middle" densities in detached SFH neighborhoods [b]via zoning redefinition end-arounds that avoid the level of input of residents of those neighborhoods that standard processes would entail.[/b]

But, hey, they want what they want, and who cares if they take it from someone else or if it ends up in places that won't have the infrastructure to support the additional residents?  Gotta make it seem like a crisis to get that done!  And please don't consider alternatives that aren't in exactly those places -- those wouldn't work for the kinds of developers they are supporting!  :roll:

Anyone with such ideas or objections must be ridiculed with strawman hyperbole and other rhetorical employment of logical fallacy.[/quote]

Eh? There is a legal process. The process includes public input. The county is following the process.[/quote]

That's an insincere response, and you know it. How often does the county [i]redefine[/i] away zoning such as they are currently pursuing?  The normal process would [i]re-zone[/i] properties, which would require more significant input from the individual neighborhoods to be rezoned.

Knowing they wouldn't get enough support there, "missing middle" supporters have adopted the zoning text amendment approach.  But even that they've messed with by not changing the entirety of R60 zoning and the like, but by limiting the changes to certain geographic areas -- essentially the neighborhoods for which they would otherwise need to use the more community-inclusive/responsive process.

And this is on top of recent redefinitions of many corridor neighborhood edges into separate "neighborhoods" (or shifting them to adjacent already-higher-density areas) so that they could apply zoning policy just to those without the same neighborhood input.

I mean, one can edge closer to the nuclear option all one wants -- that's technically part of the "legal process," too, but then we end up with hyper-polarized, junk government and Trump SCOTUS appointees.  Have you learned nothing, or do you find your policy pursuit important enough to minimize the voices of those most directly affected?[/quote]

I'm curious what the actual real world difference is between what is happening and what would happen if individual properties were rezoned?  My understanding is that the individual process requires sending something through US mail to adjacent owners letting them know what is happening and telling them how they can provide feedback.  That is the only thing that (maybe) didn't happen here.  However there was a strong public engagement plan for the Thrive plan as well as a LOT of public messaging about what is going on, as well as public hearings.  So the argument you are making is that something would have been different had a couple hundred residents received a post card in the mail?[/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