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
»
Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Reply to "MoCo Council Vote Today"
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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why can’t we build on green space up i270? I’m sure land would be cheaper.[/quote] And then add more people who ahve to drive everywhere on roads that are already overcongested. hence focusing housing in transit corridors, you know, the way the rest of the world does it.[/quote] While I agree with that, it would be harder to make housing affordable to middle-class people in Bethesda, Chevy Chase, and parts of Rockville. While we should work toward that goal, it would be wise to have alternatives in the meantime. I don’t believe this new housing in the previously mentioned areas will be affordable for a two-person household with a $150,000 annual income.[/quote] Affordability will be relative to the other homes in the local area, and relative to what prices would ultimately do without the additional supply. Realistically, yes, new construction close-in is going to be expensive. But unless we reduce the wide gap being the housing supply and the growing demand year-over-year, housing costs will continue to grow faster than incomes can accommodate. There's no quick fix here. This change certainly isn't going to fix the affordable housing problem on its own, but it will at least help to limit how quickly things get worse.[/quote] This is a reasonable, fact-based case for this proposal. Why do you think the sponsors and the members who voted for it thought they had to lie about what the ZTA does by pretending the housing will be affordable for teachers? This ridiculous lie about it being “workforce” housing drove my skepticism of the bill, especially considering that the implied rent at 120 percent AMI is more than $3,000 a month and more than a third higher the current average rent in the county. [/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