Anonymous wrote:Sighhhhhhh
America so desperately thinks they can plan urban design like Japan, but it will be a disaster because America never plans anything right. For starters, the US doesn't have the infrastructure to be designed like Japan. Our public transport sucks ass. Everyone drives everywhere.
All we are going to get are a bunch of neighborhoods that were designed for SFHs now flooded with townhouses, multiplexes and apartments. You are ging to get a million cars parking on the streets, trash problems, and water problems. People are still going to drive everywhere.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.
Exactly. A lot of this “movement” is driven by developers who manipulate the public and well intentioned but not well versed politicians to vote for YIMBY policies. The developers not only make big bucks off of the new homes (vs creating more affordable homes) but they are often getting enormous tax breaks that put the full burden of needed infrastructure and school expansion on the backs of the very same tax payers who can’t afford homes.
Follow the money. In MoCo the drivers of these plans have been developers. Friedson and Glass, have taken money from developer lobbying groups.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.
-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.
-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.
-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?
-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.
This is hogwash. Seriously. Are you gaslighting?
Eliminating SFH zoning means I can build a condo building in any neighborhood I want and the height restrictions - at least as imagined in places like MoCo by our nutty Council - is up to five stories.
It also means I can cram units into one lot and build right up to the lot line.
And all of this while Maryland can’t afford basic maintenance if infrastructure and our schools struggle in MoCo to do basic updates.
As soon as my kids are in college, I’m out of the state. That gives me no joy as a life-long Marylander and a Democratic voter. “Progressives” are the death of us.
No you can't build a condo in a neighborhood. You can have 8 townhouses but not a condo. There is a height restriction by building codes.
You are bombastic and have no credibility.
Bye Felicia.
Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.
-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.
-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.
-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?
-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.
My response:
Eliminate SF zoning: A wall of 50 foot tall townhomes would block the sunlight to my yard and home
8 unit/acre density: my neighborhood was designed planned for 1 unit/acre density, roads cannot handle 6-8x traffic and there is no ROW to make roads with 8x density.
Lot coverage limits: This will increase run-off/impervious surfacwes. It will create a higher risk of flooding and water damage for homes in my neighborhood. I have already experienced an increase in flooding from my neighbors home addition, eliminating lot coverage requirements will make this much worse.
Reducing setbacks: Increases the risk of fires spreading from home to home and it will raise home insurance rates. Home insurance companies use the distance from neighboring buildings in their risk models because it increased the risk of wind damage, fire damage, etc.
Setbacks of 5-10ft can also create significant noise pollution issues, when homes have AC units right next to your property line.
Eliminating height limits: people are going to build whatever they are allowed to build a that is economically feasible to build. Yes people will absolutely build 45-50 foot homes on postage stamps lots. This will turn my house into a basement, kill my garden and make it feel like I live in a fishbowl.
The limit is 35 ft high.
It protects people trying to build smaller houses.
No it does not say this. It says notwithstanding any other law, a legislative body may not establish any requirements that directly or indirectly regulate exterior dimensions. That means that height limits for residential zoning will be unenforceable for areas subject to this law. You either did not read this bill or you are lying to reduce opposition to it.
Well, that’s because there is another law called building code that limits it to 35 feet. Ffs!
Yes, the bill does not state everything we already know.
The building limit is so that people can make shorter buildings, not taller buildings.
The building code does not limit height to 35ft zoning does. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Yes it does.
Anonymous wrote:Cities that have tried zoning changes to allow multiple residences on single lots have not experienced more affordable homes and created a developer bonanza. No reason to believe the result will be different in Maryland.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
-Eliminate single family zoning: All this means is that they will allow townhomes where there is single family zoning.
-Enforce a minimum zoned density of 8units/acre - this is only for townhomes with public water and this is a common industry standard.
-Eliminate lot coverage limits: This just means houses will be closer together like in the Kentlands in Maryland, essentially no yard. It makes houses more affordable.
-Make lot setbacks 5ft side/10ft front - IDK if I care about this or not, why do you?
-Eliminate height restrictions: This at 1st glance might make you think they can build bigger structure but it is so they can build smaller more affordable homes.
This is hogwash. Seriously. Are you gaslighting?
Eliminating SFH zoning means I can build a condo building in any neighborhood I want and the height restrictions - at least as imagined in places like MoCo by our nutty Council - is up to five stories.
It also means I can cram units into one lot and build right up to the lot line.
And all of this while Maryland can’t afford basic maintenance if infrastructure and our schools struggle in MoCo to do basic updates.
As soon as my kids are in college, I’m out of the state. That gives me no joy as a life-long Marylander and a Democratic voter. “Progressives” are the death of us.