Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m saying the proposal allows for too much density. I bought in an R60 zone and it should stay that way. If Takoma
Park wants this, carve out an exception for them. Don’t pretend this won’t bring more vehicle traffic to already crowded neighborhoods. Riemer doesn’t like to do too much analysis on these proposals. Handling this by forcing it on the entire county is heavy handed.

It is staying that way. The lot size (6000 square feet) is staying the same, the setbacks are staying the same, the building heights are staying the same, the coverage is staying the same... The only difference is that you would be allowed to convert part of your house into an apartment (subject to conditions).

I will note that much of the area zoned for R60 is inside the Beltway in Bethesda and close-in Silver Spring, which is exactly where there should be more housing added.

???
You are not making sense. This new legislation allows you to put a 1200 square foot structure on a lot of 6,000 square feet that already has a house. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTY? This totally sucks.

Anonymous wrote:I’d be happier about this proposal if I thought the county had any interest in enforcing the current code or future code. People post illegal ADUs for rent on NextDoor and FB Marketplace and Craigslist all the time. The county could be sitting on a cash cow of fines and also making housing safer for tenants who are living in unsafe conditions, and addressing safety and infrastructure in neighborhoods that have 3 and 4 families living in single family homes.

It is clear that safety is not a concern.

And agree that the County is missing out on a ton of fines and also income from the landlords filing rental license applications. Plus of course, the cash only income is certainly not being reported by the landlords. So much illegal activity already.

Anonymous wrote:I’d be happier about this proposal if I thought the county had any interest in enforcing the current code or future code. People post illegal ADUs for rent on NextDoor and FB Marketplace and Craigslist all the time. The county could be sitting on a cash cow of fines and also making housing safer for tenants who are living in unsafe conditions, and addressing safety and infrastructure in neighborhoods that have 3 and 4 families living in single family homes.

This

We have several of these in our neighborhoods. Normally owned by Chinese landlords and rented out to recent (Latino) immigrants. They are absolutely not up to code. Not up to building code and not up to fire code. No rental licenses. There is currently very little enforcement.

One of these homes recently was purchased and the new owners found that ALL the electric work had to be redone. There were huge issues and none of the wiring was done as it should have been. Definitely fire hazards.

It is clear that the County is not enforcing the laws that are already in place. This has allowed these illegal rentals to flourish. Like PP said, you can find them all over Craigslist and NextDoor.

I’d be happier about this proposal if I thought the county had any interest in enforcing the current code or future code. People post illegal ADUs for rent on NextDoor and FB Marketplace and Craigslist all the time. The county could be sitting on a cash cow of fines and also making housing safer for tenants who are living in unsafe conditions, and addressing safety and infrastructure in neighborhoods that have 3 and 4 families living in single family homes.

There's a difference between buying IN a neighborhood and buying a neighborhood.

There's also a difference between not wanting anything in your neighborhood to change and believing that you are entitled to not having anything in your neighborhood change.

All the proposed ADU change does is let you make the decision about adding an apartment to your property and let your neighbor make the decision about adding an apartment to their property.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

Nobody is forcing you to add an ADU to your property.

What you mean is: you should have a right to enjoy the single-family houses your neighbors purchased.

DP

No, what she is saying is that she moved to a neighborhood with single family homes so that she wouldn’t have to deal with the congestion and traffic and parking issues in other areas.

When you add additional illegal apartments to an area that isn’t meant for them, it makes the area more crowded.

But the ADU proposal is about adding LEGAL apartments.

And there's nothing about an area to make it "meant for" or "not meant for" anything, except the zoning laws, which can be changed.

You buy a house. You don't buy a neighborhood, and you certainly don't buy a guarantee that everything will stay the same as when you bought your house.

What?? You absolutely buy in a ‘neighborhood’. People choose to live in a densely populated urban neighborhood, or a more car-dependent suburban neighborhood, or a rural neighborhood where they can have farm animals.

And it’s completely reasonable for people to want their ‘neighborhoods’ to retain their character. This is true with gentrification in parts of DC and urbanization in the suburban parts of MoCO.

Anonymous wrote:I’m saying the proposal allows for too much density. I bought in an R60 zone and it should stay that way. If Takoma
Park wants this, carve out an exception for them. Don’t pretend this won’t bring more vehicle traffic to already crowded neighborhoods. Riemer doesn’t like to do too much analysis on these proposals. Handling this by forcing it on the entire county is heavy handed.

It is staying that way. The lot size (6000 square feet) is staying the same, the setbacks are staying the same, the building heights are staying the same, the coverage is staying the same... The only difference is that you would be allowed to convert part of your house into an apartment (subject to conditions).

I will note that much of the area zoned for R60 is inside the Beltway in Bethesda and close-in Silver Spring, which is exactly where there should be more housing added.

I’m saying the proposal allows for too much density. I bought in an R60 zone and it should stay that way. If Takoma
Park wants this, carve out an exception for them. Don’t pretend this won’t bring more vehicle traffic to already crowded neighborhoods. Riemer doesn’t like to do too much analysis on these proposals. Handling this by forcing it on the entire county is heavy handed.

Anonymous wrote:You can have ADUs within 300 feet of one another under Riemer’s proposed legislation. 300 feet. That negatively impacts your other neighbors in a significant way. The proposal is irresponsible.

Um, yes?

You seem to be saying that your one neighbor shouldn't get to have a legal basement apartment on their property if your other neighbor already has a legal basement apartment on their property, because you don't want to there to be two legal basement apartments near your house. Is that what you're saying?

You can have ADUs within 300 feet of one another under Riemer’s proposed legislation. 300 feet. That negatively impacts your other neighbors in a significant way. The proposal is irresponsible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

Nobody is forcing you to add an ADU to your property.

What you mean is: you should have a right to enjoy the single-family houses your neighbors purchased.

DP

No, what she is saying is that she moved to a neighborhood with single family homes so that she wouldn’t have to deal with the congestion and traffic and parking issues in other areas.

When you add additional illegal apartments to an area that isn’t meant for them, it makes the area more crowded.

But the ADU proposal is about adding LEGAL apartments.

And there's nothing about an area to make it "meant for" or "not meant for" anything, except the zoning laws, which can be changed.

You buy a house. You don't buy a neighborhood, and you certainly don't buy a guarantee that everything will stay the same as when you bought your house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

There are a sh$t ton of options in this area for people who prefer living in an area with high density housing. MoVo is close to DC if people want an urban environment. Parts of Bethesda and Rockville have been developed to be more urban.

On the flip side, there is a huge shortage of SFHs for this of us hi want more ‘space’ and don’t want to live directly on top of our neighbors.

This is a terrible idea.

If you consider a basement apartment in a single-family house with a yard as high-density or urban housing, then your definitions of the terms are evidently very very very different from mine.

Also, 82% of land in Montgomery County (excluding City of Rockville and City of Gaithersburg) is either protected open space (35%) or restricted to detached single family houses (48%). So I disagree that there's a huge shortage of detached single-family houses in Montgomery County.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

Nobody is forcing you to add an ADU to your property.

What you mean is: you should have a right to enjoy the single-family houses your neighbors purchased.

DP

No, what she is saying is that she moved to a neighborhood with single family homes so that she wouldn’t have to deal with the congestion and traffic and parking issues in other areas.

When you add additional illegal apartments to an area that isn’t meant for them, it makes the area more crowded.

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

There are a sh$t ton of options in this area for people who prefer living in an area with high density housing. MoVo is close to DC if people want an urban environment. Parts of Bethesda and Rockville have been developed to be more urban.

On the flip side, there is a huge shortage of SFHs for this of us hi want more ‘space’ and don’t want to live directly on top of our neighbors.

This is a terrible idea.

Anonymous wrote:What’s crazy is deciding that some property owners have more rights than other property owners. I should have a right to enjoy the single family house I purchased. Some of the illegal apartments in my neighborhood are okay, others are terrible. Behind me is an illegal apartment and the ceiling is very low. There’s no parking to start with but now they’ve added multiple vehicles.

Nobody is forcing you to add an ADU to your property.

What you mean is: you should have a right to enjoy the single-family houses your neighbors purchased.