The Montgomery County Council took the first major step toward realization of its radical, warmed-over Reaganomics "Thrive 2050" plan yesterday, by approving construction of duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, and apartment buildings up to four stories tall on lots currently restricted to single-family homes along multiple commuter corridors. True to its form of recent years, the Council simply blew off community opposition, and a crowded hearing room of angry residents. Taunting the crowd at times, the Council's sense of invincibility was hard to hide in both their microexpressions and tone of voice. The "More Housing N.O.W." zoning text amendment - like Thrive 2050 - had no grassroots support, and overwhelming opposition among residents.
Steamrolling ahead, the Council's willingness to outright lie about the intention of the ZTA was astonishing. From the beginning, they have attempted to sell Thrive and this ZTA as addressing housing affordability issues. Councilmember Andrew Friedson specifically cited middle-income "teachers, firefighters, police officers and nurses" as being able to afford the $2 million duplexes and $1 million apartments that the ZTA will produce. This is nothing more than pure, unadulterated malarkey. Incredibly, the reporter from The Washington Post accepted this farcical statement at face value, declining to fact check Friedson, ask tough follow-up questions, or outright declare Friedson's statements as false, as the paper regularly does for Donald Trump. The Post even used the term "missing middle," which doesn't remotely apply to the multimillion-dollar units that will be constructed under this ZTA.
 |
| Eligible properties (in pink and yellow) in Aspen Hill, Glenmont, and Wheaton |
All this ZTA will do is increase the cost of housing in Montgomery County. If the townhome right next to the parking garage with no backyard at Westbard Square is $1.x million, then the future duplex with half a backyard and half a front yard in Springfield has to go for $2.x million. Now the colonial with the full front yard and backyard and Whitman school district is suddenly $3.x million, and the new-construction McMansion is $4.x million. Heckuva job, Brownie!
Urbanization of the suburbs is the primary goal of the ZTA. For example, the map of eligible properties shows how this ZTA is advancing the plan to urbanize River Road between the D.C. line and the Capital Beltway, which I have warned you about for many years. You can see the many churches, schools, country clubs, and other large properties the Council and their developer sugar daddies imagine will be demolished in the coming years. The speed limit on River Road has already been improperly reduced to 35 MPH, the exact opposite of sound traffic engineering, as the road is designed for speeds up to 55 MPH. Eventually, under the urbanization plan, River Road will be reduced to one lane in each direction, with bus/bike-only lanes seizing the other travel lanes heading east and west. A Purple Line extension to Westbard will be planned to juice density even further. As tall apartment buildings rise along the sides of River Road, the speed limit will drop to 25 MPH. Similar plans are in the works for Georgia Avenue between Olney and downtown Silver Spring, Old Georgetown Road, Veirs Mill Road, Route 29, MD 355, and other major commuter routes countywide.
Here is how each Councilmember voted on the ZTA yesterday. The names under "YES" are the people you will be voting AGAINST on your 2026 ballot, and the names under "NO" are the people you will be voting FOR in the 2026 Democratic primary election.
YES - to approve the ZTA
Gabe Albornoz
Marilyn Balcombe
Natali Fani-Gonzalez
Andrew Friedson
Evan Glass
Dawn Luedtke
Laurie-Anne Sayles
Kate Stewart
NO - to oppose the ZTA
Will Jawando
Sidney Katz
Kristin Mink
thanks for the robust economic analysis. definitely no political bias or sensationalism here!
ReplyDelete10:22: You're mad because I don't accept Andrew Friedson's gaslighting at face value? Get back to me when a nurse buys a $2.x million duplex. LOL
DeleteIt was fun schadenfreud to see the same liberal Democrats who support and vote for an exclusively liberal Democrat County Council then get ABSOLUTELY ignored and hosed when those politicians ignore their pleas and ruin their neighborhoods.
DeleteI've got to say, I'm surprised Jawando voted against it. I just assumed he was for anything that hastened the decline of MoCo.
ReplyDeleteMy family has been in Chevy Chase for over 100 years, on Woodbine, Primrose, and now Connecticut Avenue. My house is within the designated modification zone, and I can but shrug. As a child I puzzled upon hearing the phrase, "It's their world, we just live in it." Today's vote is just the latest in an ever more hopeless series of lessons that serve to remind, with vivid, dictatorial clarity, exactly what that phrase means.
I hope the Council and their builder/developer patrons find themselves diagnosed with a rich assortment of painful, terminal afflictions. I'd add "embarrassing," but it has long been clear that word is altogether without meaning or effect on that cabal.
"If the townhome right next to the parking garage with no backyard at Westbard Square is $1.x million, then the future duplex with half a backyard and half a front yard in Springfield has to go for $2.x million. Now the colonial with the full front yard and backyard and Whitman school district is suddenly $3.x million, and the new-construction McMansion is $4.x million. "
ReplyDeleteUh... What? That's not how markets work.
11:19: That's exactly how home prices work in Montgomery County and most other places these days. There hasn't been a functioning "market" in housing for some time. The more supply is generated in Montgomery County, the higher the housing prices and rents go. If your dogbox at the shopping center is $1.x million, how much is a bigger duplex with yard space? Hint: it's going to be more.
DeleteSo Robert, let’s hear your plan to increase the amount of affordable housing in MoCo. It sounds like you propose less or no new housing supply, which sounds like a flawed idea.Or do you suggest existing single houses along 100’ wide rights of way, be required to degrade until they become “naturally affordable”?
ReplyDelete12:00 PM: There's nothing stopping renovation or teardown of SFHs. But homes in Kenwood, for example, are approaching 100 years of age, and will never be "naturally affordable." Even toxic chemical weapons haven't dented the prices in Spring Valley. Government is really the only stakeholder that can deliver mass quantities of affordable housing units at scale, via public housing. On the private sector side, a tax on vacant apartments would quickly bring down rents, and restore market forces to a sector where collusion rules at the moment. If we are truly in a housing "crisis," then I would also presume we no longer can afford the luxury of an agricultural reserve sitting undeveloped, and should be allowing construction of a Levittown of starter homes out there.
DeleteThanks for posting your thoughts. Makes a lot of sense. I never considered the impact of the Ag Reserve on the economics of housing. Maybe your plan works with thoughtful mass transit like BRT to access smaller new remote planned villages surrounded by homes in the farmland. Less congestion on I-270, and the creation of all new planned walkable communities. Perhaps a bit like King Farms.
DeleteAn excellent article on how building smaller and cheaper units in triplex’s and duplexes, instead of large McMansions or very large and expensive units can create more affordable housing. Even the idea of allowing smaller lot sizes so that smaller “starter homes” can make financial sense for developers.
ReplyDeletehttps://ggwash.org/view/99926/how-re-legalizing-starter-homes-cuts-new-house-prices
12:10: Unfortunately, starter homes are not what this ZTA is creating.
DeletePerhaps an incentive to replace larger aging older homes on larger lots with multiple smaller attached units. Many folks don’t really need massive four story high four bedroom homes that are 20’ wide. Build three simple 1500 two bedroom homes to replace an older 2500 home, and the developer gets a tax break for doing so.
DeleteTerrifying doesn't quite describe this does it? It's worse. A friend of mine told me about this insane plan some months ago. Like many I had no idea but it is coming. And bike lanes everywhere as states recently on channel 4 by a local official. That's their plan to put bike lanes on every conceivable artery.
DeleteSad to say it, but we can't have the luxury of the current Agricultural Preserve.
ReplyDeleteIt is 1/3 of the total county land area.
When housing markets were functioning, it was nice to have. Times have changed.
A small % could be used for a new neighborhood.
> “Eventually, under the urbanization plan, River Road will be reduced to one lane in each direction, with bus/bike-only lanes seizing the other travel lanes heading east and west. A Purple Line extension to Westbard will be planned to juice density even further. As tall apartment buildings rise along the sides of River Road, the speed limit will drop to 25 MPH.”
ReplyDeleteI need this so bad
1:41 - We are but temporary stewards of this planet, and land is a finite resource. Your idea is the camel's nose under the tent, and with this Council, you'd have a full blown "Levittown" out past Darnestown with a million new people living out there. Then what? What would you say to future generations' children?
ReplyDelete12:00 pm - - you're going to have to come to grips with the phrase -"there is no affordable housing downcounty". Where's the affordable housing in Manhattan? That ship has sailed.
ReplyDeleteI'm still puzzling why we need more housing. I argue it is reasonable to say, "Sorry, we're full." Yes, you can cram more [X] into container [Y], but is there no consideration for the infrastructure needed to accommodate that? I'm not just talking about the roads or electricity or sewerage or schools. One commenter wishes away the ag reserve as a luxury we can no longer afford, because we need to get more people into the area. No, we don’t need to. At the risk of stating the obvious, I'll point out the ag reserve isn’t just a tourist spot, kept for weekend drives in the country. It actually serves a purpose: THEY GROW FOOD THERE. No, it isn't the sole or primary source of sustenance for residents of the county, but it plays a part in feeding people. What a miserably short-sighted idea it is to champion continued increase in the number of mouths to feed while simultaneously suggesting we remove sources of food for said mouths.
ReplyDeleteI get it. Teachers, firefighters, store personnel, mid-level office workers can't afford to live locally. Where is it written people are entitled to live within walking distance of their jobs? The mythic Purple Line is now estimated to cost $10 billion. I appreciate its function serves primarily as a stalking horse to allow land developers and the County Council to build more apartment blocks, to house ever more people (who will shoulder the ever-increasing tax burden the Council absolves commercial and business owners of bearing.) But at least nominally, the PL might also be employed to fulfill it nominal purpose, shuttling people between their more affordable housing in other areas and the --few remaining, as Robert's ongoing coverage attests-- jobs in the area. There is no *right* to live in a particular community, and more than anyone has a right to a two-month late-summer holiday in Italy. We may like such or think ourselves deserving , but no one is entitled to one. Nor are people entitled to live in a specific neighborhood or portion of the county. There comes a point at which it is not unreasonable to say the inn is full. Just because you are the last person in the life boat doesn’t mean you can’t point out the boat is full.
Now come the frothing replies to my NIMBYism. Have at it. I have voted Dem all my life and continue to, I don’t own a gun.
@6:46 No frothing replies as the right side of the aisle expects exactly this kind of hypocrisy on display. While I don't disagree with some of the statements, the left demonstrates liberal idealism with the understanding that you do it somewhere else with someone else's money.
DeleteJust sitting back and enjoying your side eating each other. Who knows, if you stop voting these leftists in you might reach sanity by retirement age.
"I get it. Teachers, firefighters, store personnel, mid-level office workers can't afford to live locally."
DeleteDo you really get it? Your statement seems to say you don't get it at all ... so, tell us, where are "regular working people" supposed to live? Is a 2-hour commute each way regardless of transportation mode (public, carpool, driving, etc.) your idea of reasonable? That costs people a lot in both time *and* money.
The free market should be allowed to work here. If folks can’t stomach the commute to their jobs they will quit, until they are paid enough to make it worth their time/money to come to MoCo to work.
Delete@8:23 It's not the "free market" when the planning board and county council overwhelmingly favor developers over taxpaying residents and displace said residents out of their otherwise affordable neighborhoods, homes, and businesses.
DeleteNot unique to MoCo ... sadly, it's across the board and across this country.
12:03 - That's such a great point. There eating their own with not even a simply think you note for your vote. It's really unbelievable. And by the way, why do the hard core libs or any other Democrat voter not say a word about this? That's a bipartisan issue is there ever was one in MoCo. Yep. They'll destroy Chevy Chase and more and not think a think about it. Start packing if you can.
ReplyDeleteThis is just the latest scheme to allow developers to upzone without having the Council getting their hands dirty by voting on individual zoning changes that help the BIG BAD DEVELOPERS and the REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY (that indirectly fund all of them). The Montgomery County Council has been doing this for more than 50 years with various schemes like Transfer of Development Rights and Moderate Price Dwelling Units.
ReplyDeleteFollow the money 💰💰💰. Everything Andrew Friedman does can be traced back to big fat cat commercial developers who found Friedman’s political aspirations.
ReplyDeleteOy veh, say it ain't so.
DeleteThe political tactic of saying something is being done so firefighters and other first responders can live in the county is odd - why not simply pay them more if they can't get by at current wages?
ReplyDeleteAnd how many cops, firefighters, Giant cashiers, etc. will be moving into the new luxury townhomes at Westbard? Lol
I've often wondered who to go to in MoCo to address seemingly minor traffic-related decisions. Things like the lights on Westbard now that sit red for 5 minutes without cross traffic at the Tatte, the reduced speed limit on River, the timing of the light at River/Whittier that backs traffic up 2x/day on Whittier all the way to the high school, the light at Holton Arms that stops River traffic when school isn't in session, etc. For those in the River Rd corridor, these are just time-sucking inconveniences that don't seem to provide much/any safety benefit. Heck, River backs up nearly every afternoon toward the Beltway because of the light timing, not the actual volume of traffic. Who is responsible for things like that around here? Who can get some of those things changed?
ReplyDeleteWon't SFHs be worth much more if someone can buy your house and build a 4-unit condo building on it? Sounds great to me!
ReplyDelete1158, the things you mention are features not bugs. MoCo power structure folks don’t like people getting around via automobile.
ReplyDeleteOn the County website, the purpose of ZTAs are described, including these words: "...designed to control street congestion; ... avoid an undue concentration of population; and promote or facilitate adequate transportation, water, sewerage, schools, recreation, parks,
ReplyDeleteand other public facilities."
This ZTA is counter to all these goals, especially "avoid an undue concentration of population."
It seems that the County Council is acting in direct violation of these goals.