Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It will ruin neighborhoods and reduce properties values in some neighborhoods without protections from excessive density. Neighborhoods with protective covenants and HOA's that prevent multifamily housing will become more valuable. Some properties close in that have higher redevelopment potential will increase in value due to higher land prices. Many of the others will lose value and resident quality of life will go down hill. Single family communities close to high quality private schools with strong HOA/Covenants to protect thew neighborhood are likely safe. However, many middle class homeowners in desirable school attendance zones will be financially destroyed if this passes.
Federal state and local laws overrule covenants. That’s why covenants like not being able to not sell to certain third of people are outlawed.
I don’t think that opposition to this initiative is about that. Opposition is about disruption in communities that cannot withstand additional density, pressure to infrastructure and schools, increased traffic and the risk that comes with it….and the benefit only to developers who want the business and leave the communities to deal with the mess they create. This is not of benefit to anyone but to developers.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It will ruin neighborhoods and reduce properties values in some neighborhoods without protections from excessive density. Neighborhoods with protective covenants and HOA's that prevent multifamily housing will become more valuable. Some properties close in that have higher redevelopment potential will increase in value due to higher land prices. Many of the others will lose value and resident quality of life will go down hill. Single family communities close to high quality private schools with strong HOA/Covenants to protect thew neighborhood are likely safe. However, many middle class homeowners in desirable school attendance zones will be financially destroyed if this passes.
Federal state and local laws overrule covenants. That’s why covenants like not being able to not sell to certain third of people are outlawed.
Anonymous wrote:It will ruin neighborhoods and reduce properties values in some neighborhoods without protections from excessive density. Neighborhoods with protective covenants and HOA's that prevent multifamily housing will become more valuable. Some properties close in that have higher redevelopment potential will increase in value due to higher land prices. Many of the others will lose value and resident quality of life will go down hill. Single family communities close to high quality private schools with strong HOA/Covenants to protect thew neighborhood are likely safe. However, many middle class homeowners in desirable school attendance zones will be financially destroyed if this passes.
Anonymous wrote:Another stupid bill passed by the County Council
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are so many Potomac properties like this one, that have high values despite very old and unappealing houses, because they are located in appealing areas (and the linked one below is on a large plot of land). It makes sense to me that these would be extremely valuable for developers to buy up and convert, and it could dramatically transform parts of the Potomac. Any thoughts on that?
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Rockville/13008-Foxden-Dr-20850/home/10504472
Zoning is RE-1 (residential estate). Not part of the proposed changes (R-40, R-60, R-90, R-200, but not where a municipality like Rockville has its own zoning authority). Many of the wealthiest areas are not affected, whether by alternate zoning, by historic designation or by covenant, which is among the reasons this would be typical of bad policy -- protection for those at the top, squeeze the middle and call it just because it might help the bottom.
Technically, it does impact Residential Estate zones areas because they are doing to change the definition allowable housing types to include small multifamily units. However, practically speaking you won’t see many plex units built in RE zones areas because they don’t have public sewer or it is more profitable to build a new SFH.
No, the Attainable Housing proposed changes to zoning definition do not include RE-1 zoning, only R-40, R-60, R-90 and R-200. This property, and those similarly zoned, are excluded, tending to protect the wealthiest, as noted, along with the plan's lack of effect where municipal zoning, historic designation or covenants exist.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are so many Potomac properties like this one, that have high values despite very old and unappealing houses, because they are located in appealing areas (and the linked one below is on a large plot of land). It makes sense to me that these would be extremely valuable for developers to buy up and convert, and it could dramatically transform parts of the Potomac. Any thoughts on that?
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Rockville/13008-Foxden-Dr-20850/home/10504472
Zoning is RE-1 (residential estate). Not part of the proposed changes (R-40, R-60, R-90, R-200, but not where a municipality like Rockville has its own zoning authority). Many of the wealthiest areas are not affected, whether by alternate zoning, by historic designation or by covenant, which is among the reasons this would be typical of bad policy -- protection for those at the top, squeeze the middle and call it just because it might help the bottom.
Technically, it does impact Residential Estate zones areas because they are doing to change the definition allowable housing types to include small multifamily units. However, practically speaking you won’t see many plex units built in RE zones areas because they don’t have public sewer or it is more profitable to build a new SFH.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are so many Potomac properties like this one, that have high values despite very old and unappealing houses, because they are located in appealing areas (and the linked one below is on a large plot of land). It makes sense to me that these would be extremely valuable for developers to buy up and convert, and it could dramatically transform parts of the Potomac. Any thoughts on that?
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Rockville/13008-Foxden-Dr-20850/home/10504472
WTF? That house has beautiful bones and will make a lovely family home with a spruce up. We bought a very similar one recently and will live here till the end of our days.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are so many Potomac properties like this one, that have high values despite very old and unappealing houses, because they are located in appealing areas (and the linked one below is on a large plot of land). It makes sense to me that these would be extremely valuable for developers to buy up and convert, and it could dramatically transform parts of the Potomac. Any thoughts on that?
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Rockville/13008-Foxden-Dr-20850/home/10504472
Zoning is RE-1 (residential estate). Not part of the proposed changes (R-40, R-60, R-90, R-200, but not where a municipality like Rockville has its own zoning authority). Many of the wealthiest areas are not affected, whether by alternate zoning, by historic designation or by covenant, which is among the reasons this would be typical of bad policy -- protection for those at the top, squeeze the middle and call it just because it might help the bottom.
Anonymous wrote:There are so many Potomac properties like this one, that have high values despite very old and unappealing houses, because they are located in appealing areas (and the linked one below is on a large plot of land). It makes sense to me that these would be extremely valuable for developers to buy up and convert, and it could dramatically transform parts of the Potomac. Any thoughts on that?
https://www.redfin.com/MD/Rockville/13008-Foxden-Dr-20850/home/10504472