Friday, January 20, 2017

MoCo Councilman plotting new way to overcrowd roads, classrooms

Montgomery County's public schools and roads are already filled to overcapacity. The promise that unfettered residential growth would generate massive tax revenues has given way to the reality of a massive structural County budget deficit. Despite all that, County Councilman Hans Riemer wants to pack in as many more new residents as possible.

During a recent Twitter discussion, Riemer said he wanted to pursue a zoning change that would allow single-family home properties in the county to be subdivided into two residences, in the form of duplexes. Given that today's smaller families would easily fit into a duplex unit, Riemer's plan would massively increase the student generation rate in existing neighborhoods. Not to mention the impact on MoCo's traffic congestion, already rated the worst in America.


Riemer's exchange with pro-urbanization blogger Dan Reed requires some background to fully appreciate. Reed was at one time a staff member in Councilmember George Leventhal's office. Leventhal infamously called the suburbs "a mistake," and in a 2010 television appearance, displayed a rendering showing a single-family home being replaced by an apartment building. This dystopian vision for urbanization of existing SFH neighborhoods is one of the worst-kept secrets of the Montgomery County political cartel.

The bulldozing of single-family homes at the edges of current and future urban centers in the county will begin in areas where real estate values are lower - Aspen Hill, Twinbrook, Glenmont, Wheaton, and White Oak, for example. But what about places like Chevy Chase, East Bethesda and "Westbard," where teardowns get replaced with two-million-dollar homes? It's unlikely a development firm could afford to buy blocks worth of such homes in the 20814 and 20816 zip codes.

Reed memorably lamented this obstacle to bringing urban density to the suburbs a few years ago, and proposed a solution of converting large luxury homes (often derided by critics as "McMansions") into what would essentially be boarding houses with multiple units inside (however, it was not clear what sort of nuclear armageddon, Maoist cultural revolution, or similar catastrophe would have displaced the wealthy families who currently reside inside these homes).

So as Reed contemplated the million-dollar home obstacle in Chevy Chase again in late December, Riemer had a bright idea - what about duplexes? Twice the strain on schools and roads, and twice the drain on County revenues. What's not to like, right?

Remember, he's not talking about greenfield development. Riemer explicitly tweeted, "this is specifically single lot redevelopment."

For a guy who voted to urbanize the established, low-density "Westbard" area of Bethesda, while falsely claiming it was a "mile from two Metros," such zeal for overcrowding doesn't surprise.

But the exchange showed again how little California carpetbagger Riemer understands Montgomery County. 

Duplexes are considered lower-class, not desirable. And Riemer asked if there are "market examples" of duplexes in Montgomery County. He's obviously never made it to Aquarius in Aspen Hill, or Berry Street near Glenmont, to name just two. Not surprising for a guy who needs a GPS to find his way around the county. But those were new developments - Riemer is proposing retrofitting the whole county for duplexes. Good luck with that.

"I am going to look into this further," Riemer vowed. Given his disastrous record on liquor reform, food trucks, the "nighttime economy," and cybersecurity, those words are your cue to either chuckle...or run for the hills.

11 comments:

  1. Riemer is asking people for their opinions and then says he'll look into their ideas further?! Say it ain't so! This is how the Communists win! Or something.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is how the Communists win in Montgomery County, but it didn't go down quite as you described. The duplex idea is Riemer's, and he said he's going to pursue it. His constituents haven't asked for it, just his developer donors.

      Delete
  2. I prefer communism. Wheaton would be much better off with row houses than single family homes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Confusing why you have a problem with it. Congestion is a result of too many people in cars - improve the public transportation and alternative methods of commuting (sidewalks, buslanes) and the congestion will be manageable. The best way to improve the infrastructure is bringing more people (and tax dollars) in. Also, closer living is environmentally sounder. Two houses instead of one big house (or a yard with resource-wasting green grass) you give people options, lower costs of living, and help the planet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Submit an application to GGW... they have a job waiting for you.

      Delete
    2. 7:52: The revenue picture is quite different in reality, as I noted in my article. We have had explosive growth in residential housing, led by Clarksburg increasin 800% in population, over the last ten years.

      Yet we have a STRUCTURAL DEFICIT every year. Where is the revenue? Answer: There is none - the services required to support the new residents cost more than the revenue the new housing generates.

      Delete
    3. Except, in reality, the county doesn't run deficits and their rainy day fund is growing. Sure, fiscal adjustments are made over the course of a year as budgets become actuals, but that's just a reality in any budgeting process and isn't a negative in and of itself.

      Delete
    4. 12:52: Wrong. The County has had a budget deficit every year for years - and because it is structural, will continue to do so. Expenditures exceed revenues, period. They've had to repeatedly raise taxes and make cuts to balance the budget - not because they are wise, but because they are REQUIRED TO DO SO BY LAW.

      The insufficient revenue proves that residential development and density alone are not the magic tickets to more revenue.

      Delete
    5. Correct, they are required by law to not run a deficit. Therefore they don't. Therefore you're wrong. Of course it's always a give and take to balance the budget; the government's not supposed to be flush with cash. You think MoCo should be taking more in taxes than they need just so they can say they run a surplus? COMMUNIST!

      Delete
    6. 2:29: Even Ike Leggett would say you are wrong. A professor would give you an F for claiming that raising taxes to make up for a budget deficit means there was no deficit. At least try to stay somewhere in the known universe of reality in your arguments.

      Secondly, Montgomery County already IS taking in more in revenue than it should, but it's eaten up by the spendthrift Council. But your argument is the same as your bosses' at the Montgomery County political cartel - that massive urbanization and growth will bring a massive windfall of revenue to cover both the infrastructure, and the wild spending of our corrupt Council. Our structural deficit definitively proves you and they are dead-wrong.

      Delete
  4. Montgomery County and in particular Hans's Takoma Park has plenty of antiquated, run-down rental housing that should have long been replaced by higher density redevelopment, but we have to keep those areas "affordable" even though at one time they were middle class areas.

    ReplyDelete