Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

So you think Paris isn't for the rich?

There are multiple people here talking about Paris. I am not the above poster. But I wrote replies on this page.

Most large global cities that have tourism have expensive districts that people admire for their architecture (which differs in look by place). Paris, like NYC, has expensive areas and poor areas. What I'm focused on in my comparisons are the attractive districts from the 1st Arrondissement to the low teens.

The point of bringing up Paris is to discuss architectural styles and neighborhood scale. Paris has many neighborhoods that are slightly tall but not ugly. And dense multifamily housing with shops and attractions built in. London is attractive like this as well. I had a friend who lived in a Kensington attached rowhouse that had 4 levels. An apartment on every floor. This kind of building could feasibly replace small SFHs close to town. As could taller but not sk*scraperesque residential buildings closer to the town center. It only takes a few lots to build that kind of building. I also understand from this thread that promised green spaces are not being realized. That's going to be a permanent problem if it doesn't get settled soon.

Bethesda is clearly not Paris. It's an "Edge City". It just needs to be better developed downtown to become a nicer place to live. It's fallen off lately unless you live in a giant multimillion $ SFH. Greater density might make it more affordable although would probably never return it to what it once was - a true middle class place.

Read this for insights on edge cities.

https://www.naiop.org/research-and-publications/magazine/2021/fall-2021/business-trends/suburbs-edge-cities-and-santa-fe-a-conversation-with-joel-garreau/#:~:text=In%20addition%20to%20Tysons%2C%20Virginia,area%20near%20Raleigh%2C%20North%20Carolina

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

PP. The out of towner. I support TH's. I live in a nice one now in a town that's like 90s Bethesda. When they put up the million dollar TH's at Strathmore, I actually did the math to see what lifestyle changes would be required to qualify as a low income owner. I decided it would be ridiculous. My conclusion was teaching K-12 would be the only job I'd be willing to do with an income that would have given me a subsidized price.

I believe that bad planning and rich NIMBYS could both ruin Bethesda more than they have. But it would be a shame to make it an uglier place. So I'd let the NIMBYS win if I had to pick a side. Once the canyons are in, it's game over.

Which game is over once there are more tall buildings in downtown Bethesda?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

You apparently don't understand a lot of things. First that Bethesda is not a central city. And second, the density in the outskirts of Paris has lots of detached SFHs.

Like you have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

I love in Bethesda and LMAO that angry developer here is going to turn it into Paris. I can't imagine that level of delusion.

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

So you think Paris isn't for the rich?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

You apparently don't understand a lot of things. First that Bethesda is not a central city. And second, the density in the outskirts of Paris has lots of detached SFHs.

Like you have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

We're talking about the parts of Paris close to the center that are moderately tall...
Haussman scale. Six stories.

Not the distant Shady Grove type parts of Paris or La Defense.

The part that everyone likes and wants to visit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

PP. The out of towner. I support TH's. I live in a nice one now in a town that's like 90s Bethesda. When they put up the million dollar TH's at Strathmore, I actually did the math to see what lifestyle changes would be required to qualify as a low income owner. I decided it would be ridiculous. My conclusion was teaching K-12 would be the only job I'd be willing to do with an income that would have given me a subsidized price.

I believe that bad planning and rich NIMBYS could both ruin Bethesda more than they have. But it would be a shame to make it an uglier place. So I'd let the NIMBYS win if I had to pick a side. Once the canyons are in, it's game over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious to me that PPs are using Paris as an example of what Bethesda should look like. If that was the case, you'd have to raze nearly all the SFH where many of the UMC and wealthy live and replace them with 5-6 story apartment buildings (with no or very few garages) and rezone residential areas to mixed use.

I mean, get a grip.

Actually that could be done if the units in multifamily buildings could sell for enough money. The trick is that nobody wants infill standalone 6 unit buildings on teardown lots in SFH neighborhoods (like everyone fights about in the Arlington forum). So you have to build outward from the "taller" parts in the downtown core.

Big mirrored towers with no balconies are ugly and Bethesda's tall buildings have little architectural merit.

If people don't build 5-6 story apartment buildings but approve more density, there will just be more ugly towers.

I fully support balconies for apartments.

On the other hand, I don't think that I, or you, or anybody, should get to approve or disapprove buildings based on Do I Think This Building Is Pretty Or Ugly.

PP. Someone approves the plans. Outside of HQs or really big cities, developers usually don't try too hard to make good-looking buildings. They just want to sell space. Also to save energy.

Bethesda could have been better looking. It's trending worse. For the cost of real estate in Bethesda, I'd like to think a higher bar could be set. That doesn't involve me personally being pleased with a specific plan. It means a whole bunch of people looking down Rockville Pike and saying "Hey, this is a fun, attractive-looking neighborhood".

I think the job is actually being done by these people:

https://montgomeryplanning.org/planning/communities/downcounty/bethesda-downtown-plan/bethesda-downtown-design-advisory-panel/

Here are a couple of comments from others I found on Reddit that resonated:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bethesda/comments/1cfmbhi/worth_living_in_bethesda_as_a_young_single_person/

"That french place in the only beautiful building in the city ( the one across from the newly opening, “ala”) is pretty good. "

Cozarium 8mo ago
There is almost no action in Bethesda anymore, certainly not like its peak in the 90s. One cinema, one live theatre unless you count the one for children, a supper club whose target audience is black people in their 70s, very few bars, and 200 restaurants that usually close by 10 PM. Nothing is open 24/7 anymore except the 7-11 and the CVSs, and their pharmacies are only open 9-5, which is ridiculous for an all-night drugstore. Even in the 90s when there was much more stuff to do, we often went downtown to DC because there was so much more going on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

Attached houses (non-missing middle housing) are fine. Missing middle housing is fine too.

Considering that people think MM is trash and don’t want it in their community but have no problem with THs, I do wonder why there is an ideological refusal to promote policies that deliver housing supply and compact growth with broad community support in favor of policies that don’t.

Are you saying, "How come Planning isn't pushing attached houses instead of other types of middle housing?"

Attached houses aren't really compact growth, and the people who oppose Planning's housing proposals generally also oppose attached houses.

Thanks for confirming that you are an extremist ideologue.

Math is extremist ideology now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

You apparently don't understand a lot of things. First that Bethesda is not a central city. And second, the density in the outskirts of Paris has lots of detached SFHs.

Like you have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

The YIMBY goalposts are on wheels for convenient relocation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

Attached houses (non-missing middle housing) are fine. Missing middle housing is fine too.

Considering that people think MM is trash and don’t want it in their community but have no problem with THs, I do wonder why there is an ideological refusal to promote policies that deliver housing supply and compact growth with broad community support in favor of policies that don’t.

They’ve chosen the path of most resistance. I wonder why.

Anonymous wrote:I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

You apparently don't understand a lot of things. First that Bethesda is not a central city. And second, the density in the outskirts of Paris has lots of detached SFHs.

Like you have literally no idea what you’re talking about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

Attached houses (non-missing middle housing) are fine. Missing middle housing is fine too.

Considering that people think MM is trash and don’t want it in their community but have no problem with THs, I do wonder why there is an ideological refusal to promote policies that deliver housing supply and compact growth with broad community support in favor of policies that don’t.

Are you saying, "How come Planning isn't pushing attached houses instead of other types of middle housing?"

Attached houses aren't really compact growth, and the people who oppose Planning's housing proposals generally also oppose attached houses.

Thanks for confirming that you are an extremist ideologue.

I do actually want to turn Bethesda into Paris and raze all detached SFH. the fact that there are detached SFH so close to DC and density starts just by pike and Rose is criminal urban planning. Just purely captured by the rich

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

Attached houses (non-missing middle housing) are fine. Missing middle housing is fine too.

Considering that people think MM is trash and don’t want it in their community but have no problem with THs, I do wonder why there is an ideological refusal to promote policies that deliver housing supply and compact growth with broad community support in favor of policies that don’t.

Are you saying, "How come Planning isn't pushing attached houses instead of other types of middle housing?"

Attached houses aren't really compact growth, and the people who oppose Planning's housing proposals generally also oppose attached houses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it bad planning to have no development cap?

For one thing it makes everyone who bought bonus density into a chump.

Are the people who bought bonus density complaining?

They will be privately, certainly. In addition, what this signals to the market is that the county is not serious. So if you were a real estate investor, you just have to wait them out and eventually they will give away everything. I does the exact opposite of what they were hoping, because it makes a mockery of the rules and as a result decentivizes investors from investing now versus waiting into the future.

It is widely known that the county isn’t serious. The county thinks it’s being pro-development but instead its just giving people reasons to wait.

And as a result, lots of approved developments just sit there for years unimproved, like Westbard, Strathmore Metro, White Flint Mall, White Flint Metro, etc.

And speaking of Westbard, which is finally but slowly being built, EYA sold out 100% of their THs before breaking ground.

It’s malpractice that planning hates THs when they deliver density, consumers want them and communities don’t object to them.

And it’s a show of how extremely ideological Planning is to push missing middle instead. That should really concern everyone.

Attached houses (non-missing middle housing) are fine. Missing middle housing is fine too.

Considering that people think MM is trash and don’t want it in their community but have no problem with THs, I do wonder why there is an ideological refusal to promote policies that deliver housing supply and compact growth with broad community support in favor of policies that don’t.