Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure they will be completely surprised when a significant segment of the affluent county residents leave for Virginia due to failing schools, increasing crime, and high taxes.

No, Northern Virginia jurisdictions are pursuing the same policies, so if you can't stand it that there might be a duplex in your neighborhood, you will have to move farther away than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about having a duplex in my neighborhood. It is about the cumulative impact of having rapid population growth that will overwhelm our schools and public safety professionals. The county will also need to raise taxes to cover all of the infrastructure upgrades and build new schools. The policy proposal is not refined enough to balance competing priorities. It focuses on upzoning large swaths of the county without adequate consideration for the impact of these changes. It does not make sense to dramatically increase density in areas where there is limited or no access to public transit. IMO, it would be wiser to allow construction of duplex/triplex units in areas that are within a 1/2 mile radius of the metro station. This will mitigate the impact on roads by encouraging development in walkable areas. There are thousands of lots currently zoned R-60 or R-90 within a 1/2 radius of the metro station.

And there are miles of underutilized commercial buildings. Condos and apartments can be build there.

Commercial to mixed use commercial residential within x distance of rail seems like a logical start that’s least disruptive to the community.

That has already been done. However, why should multiunit housing be restricted to big buildings on big roads with lots of cars?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about having a duplex in my neighborhood. It is about the cumulative impact of having rapid population growth that will overwhelm our schools and public safety professionals. The county will also need to raise taxes to cover all of the infrastructure upgrades and build new schools. The policy proposal is not refined enough to balance competing priorities. It focuses on upzoning large swaths of the county without adequate consideration for the impact of these changes. It does not make sense to dramatically increase density in areas where there is limited or no access to public transit. IMO, it would be wiser to allow construction of duplex/triplex units in areas that are within a 1/2 mile radius of the metro station. This will mitigate the impact on roads by encouraging development in walkable areas. There are thousands of lots currently zoned R-60 or R-90 within a 1/2 radius of the metro station.

And there are miles of underutilized commercial buildings. Condos and apartments can be build there.

Commercial to mixed use commercial residential within x distance of rail seems like a logical start that’s least disruptive to the community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about having a duplex in my neighborhood. It is about the cumulative impact of having rapid population growth that will overwhelm our schools and public safety professionals. The county will also need to raise taxes to cover all of the infrastructure upgrades and build new schools. The policy proposal is not refined enough to balance competing priorities. It focuses on upzoning large swaths of the county without adequate consideration for the impact of these changes. It does not make sense to dramatically increase density in areas where there is limited or no access to public transit. IMO, it would be wiser to allow construction of duplex/triplex units in areas that are within a 1/2 mile radius of the metro station. This will mitigate the impact on roads by encouraging development in walkable areas. There are thousands of lots currently zoned R-60 or R-90 within a 1/2 radius of the metro station.

And there are miles of underutilized commercial buildings. Condos and apartments can be build there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure they will be completely surprised when a significant segment of the affluent county residents leave for Virginia due to failing schools, increasing crime, and high taxes.

No, Northern Virginia jurisdictions are pursuing the same policies, so if you can't stand it that there might be a duplex in your neighborhood, you will have to move farther away than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every time I go by Chevy Chase Country Club and Columbia(?) Country Club while riding the X1 bus up Connecticut Ave, I wonder how many people could have homes if those massive properties had affordable high rise buildings on them instead of golf courses.

It would literally solve the housing problems of everyone in the DC area. It’s heartbreaking.

Wow - what a great idea. I see no problems with this whatsoever.

I am a member of one of those. If the county wants to pay me my $100k fee back then go for it. Otherwise, good luck.

Why do people think they have a right to live in the most expensive neighborhoods in the country?

Why on earth do you fancy the county owes you a refund? You don’t even own the property. You just pay for the privilege of using it. After it becomes a community, you’ll no longer need to pay you dues. Problem solved.

But refunding you your initiation fee for something you’ve already used, presumably for years? That’s nutty. Go away.

And as for “living next to expensive neighborhoods” - your home value has precisely ZERO to do with it l, you conceited buggar. It’s about two things only: 1) proximity to transit (purple and red lines, and 2) open space that is currently not occupied by existing homes.


No one gives a sh!t about your silly golf course, Brett. There’s a lot more people who need affordable housing than there are members of your club. And in the end that’s all that matters. Hopefully the county will just eminent domain those clubs and be done with it.

Anonymous wrote:It's not about having a duplex in my neighborhood. It is about the cumulative impact of having rapid population growth that will overwhelm our schools and public safety professionals. The county will also need to raise taxes to cover all of the infrastructure upgrades and build new schools. The policy proposal is not refined enough to balance competing priorities. It focuses on upzoning large swaths of the county without adequate consideration for the impact of these changes. It does not make sense to dramatically increase density in areas where there is limited or no access to public transit. IMO, it would be wiser to allow construction of duplex/triplex units in areas that are within a 1/2 mile radius of the metro station. This will mitigate the impact on roads by encouraging development in walkable areas. There are thousands of lots currently zoned R-60 or R-90 within a 1/2 radius of the metro station.

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure they will be completely surprised when a significant segment of the affluent county residents leave for Virginia due to failing schools, increasing crime, and high taxes.

Anonymous wrote:This fits nicely with Moore's proposed housing bills. More density than whatever this zoning will be, and without protections for school capacity or other infrastructure, for projects within a mile of a rail station, on previoisly state-owned land or on non-profit-owned land, provided they hit certain affordability guidelines and get some funding support from the feds or the state.

Anonymous wrote:I personally want to Manhattanize the entire urban corridor from Downtown Bethesda all the way to Germantown