Reply to Bill to legally rent out pool or home gym

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Bill to legally rent out pool or home gym "

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]Seems like a terrible idea, but maybe I am in the minority.  Smells like a ZTA Trojan horse.

https://moco360.media/2023/02/01/homeowners-could-rent-out-their-pools-gyms-legally-under-jawando-bill/[/quote]
The Trojan horse here are that these businesses would operate in SFH communities and without parking minimums.

I for one hope that they extend this auto repair shops. People are doing this anyway, so may was well regulate it. Nothing wrong with a little commercial activity out of someone’s home in your community. It’s good actually. [/quote]

That's not a Trojan horse. That's explicit. It's why there needs to be a zoning text amendment.

And yes, it would affect neighborhoods with single-unit detached houses, because that's where the private pools and private home gyms mostly are. There is nothing sacrosanct about such neighborhoods or the people (including me) who live in them. [/quote]
Sure. But infrastructure in those neighborhoods are not designed to accommodate a lot of cars. The traffic safety risks are obvious from people zooming in and out of neighborhoods to go and workout. Because there is no capacity limitation, you can have a whole commercial gym at your house like a Planet Fitness. The developer who built Planet Fitness has to pay transportation impact fees to ensure that the increased infrastructure demands are accommodated. Not here. It’s wildly dangerous and pretty stupid as a matter of policy.

As PP says, it’s also a good question why it’s restricted to pools and gyms as the only acceptable commercial businesses. [/quote]

Because it's one ZTA. Are there other home-based businesses you would like to allow, in addition to pools and gyms? I can think of many.

As for wildly dangerous - I don't know why people going to a pool or a workout room would be zooming in and out of neighborhoods any more than your neighbors are already zooming in and out to go to a pool or gym elsewhere. Or for any other reason they're driving in and out.[/quote]
Every car going down a residential street where kids live and play is a risk. Maybe you don’t agree, but keeping kids safe is an important role of public policy. Intentionally increasing risk to kids for something so inessential is pretty stupid, which makes sense as to why this is coming from Jawando. [/quote]

Your stated reason is classic "won't somebody think of the children". Most of the cars are your neighbors' cars. The threat to the kids isn't from some random person who wants to pay to use someone else's pool; it's from your neighbors. It's weird how often some people oppose ideas like this by saying they endanger children, but then also oppose ideas that would make children safer, like sidewalks on their streets, or limits on parking near intersections, or speed bumps.[/quote]
You make a lot of assumptions about a lot of things to distract from the absurdity of the proposal. If this is okay, there is no reason to have zoning at all. There is no reason to have impact fees. There is no reason to distinguish residential, feeder and arterial roads.

Intentionally putting commercial traffic on a narrow residential street is dangerous and stupid. Full stop. [/quote]

I don't know how you got from "let modify zoning to allow more uses" to "let's get rid of zoning altogether".

If I'm driving to your neighbor's house, I'm not going to drive any differently depending on the reason for my trip. As though I would be a safe driver if I'm going to their pool party but a dangerous driver if I'm paying them to use their pool for my pool party?

As for commercial traffic on narrow residential streets, you're going to ask the Council to ban Amazon and other delivery drivers, right?[/quote]
The purpose of zoning is to ensure that there are not incompatible land uses. Having a commercial business with potentially thousands of customers is a land use that is not compatible with narrow residential streets. Maybe a coffee shop. But not a business that will attract large numbers of customers coming in cars. That’s what zoning and planning are supposed to be about. If the idea is that anything goes then there is really no point to zoning at all. [/quote]

Current planning and zoning methodologies are becoming more incongruous with our economy in which more people are living and working in the same place.[/quote]
I agree. Let’s be Houston. I’m coming with a strip club next to your house. [/quote]

You run a strip club out of your home? Gosh.[/quote]

Any not?  Each spouse can entertain those who wish to be entertained.  From a performer's perspective, doing at home is likely safer than in a commercial strip club.  I certainly could envision private strip parties for bachelor, etc, parties.  [/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