Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Real Estate
Reply to "MoCo “Attainable Housing” plan and property values"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am not sure I understand the document. They are proposing to rezone single family lots into lots that could accommodate duplexes, triplexes or quadplexes — have I got that right? And the rezoning would occur in these buffer zones that straddle the existing “growth corridors”? And they want to expand that area around the growth corridors to include anything within a mile of a Metro station or a MARC station? Now I understand why neighborhoods along River Road fought so hard (and unsuccessfully) to oppose the designation of the stretch of River from the Beltway to DC as a growth corridor. There really isn’t much buildable space along that stretch unless you tear down existing single family homes and replace them with denser housing. A little bit of that kind of development might be ok but not along that whole stretch of a major road. It will totally change the look and feel of the area, to say nothing of the traffic.[/quote] I don’t think a lot of people would object to lots on river road getting upzoned. The issue is that there are very few houses directly on river road and pThe issue is that they want 500 ft from the road, which includes houses in residential side streets well off the road. There is no justification for it. Furthermore and quite controversially, river road was only included as a “growth corridor” because potentially, one day in the far and distant future, the county could add transit. So it doesn’t even fit within their stated climate change goals. Everyone will have a car. As a result, it gives the game away that this is all about making developers rich and less about anything else. It’s also quite dystopian that they have intentionally changed the name from “missing middle” to “attainable housing”. What Planning and Friedson on the Council is doing does not engender trust because they are obviously talking out of both sides of their mouth. [/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