Arlington "missing middle"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, no middle class families are moving into 4-plexes. Like everyone else, they want a SFH, not some lame townhouse with zero parking.

Adding density just brings in more young people, mostly those that used to live in DC but now want a bigger place to support WFH.

Yep.

And its fine to debate the merits of increasing the density, but its insulting to suggest families are going to be buying these 750k duplexes or condos. It will be young yuppies. Lets at least ne honest about that.

Middle-class families aren't going to move into unaffordable fourplexes, they are going to hold out for even more unaffordable detached houses?

But also those fourplexes are going to be loud because of all of the families living in them?

No... they are going to get their SFH where they can afford to! Like always.

No they don't always! What are you talking about? Many, many families around here live in townhouses or condos! Get out of your bubble.

Yes, yes they do.

But not at those price points.

I lived with my family in a townhouse too. It wasnt 750k.

The people, with families, paying 750k do not choose multi family.

PP here. In fact, I do live in a $800k townhouse in Arlington! Why? Because I couldn't afford a SFH in Arlington and yet I wanted to stay close in and didn't want to commute from an hour away. I certainly consider myself middle class. I don't know why this is unbelievable to you.

I'm glad that works for you.

I can't afford an 800k house, and if I could I would make a different choice, but good for you.

That is exactly the point. Someone is claiming that families won't buy missing middle housing because it will be so expensive that if they have that much money, they will choose a SFH farther away.

I'm here to say there are plenty of families like me who will pay that much to stay closer in! Everybody makes different choices.

No there is not. We lived as a family in a set of townhomes -- 40% were rich DINKs, 50% were group rental homes, 10% were families (ie us and a couple with a baby who were likely to move by the time the kid is walking).

Missing middle is all about increasing rental market supply.

Most households aren't families. To begin with, 28% of households are single-person households. Another 35% of households have 2 people. Among households that are families, only 40% have their own children under 18 living at home.

Is there something wrong with increasing rental market supply?

I thought a big part of missing middle was to help people priced out afford to buy in the county because the current housing is unaffordable to most buyers. Creating more landlords doesn’t necessarily seem like a worthwhile venture.

How about, afford to LIVE in the county? Creating more housing people can rent doesn't seem like a worthwhile venture?

But isn’t that already being done with large apartment buildings all over the county? Isn’t the old Ballston Macy’s becoming more apartments? It just doesn’t feel like there is a dearth of rentals in the county.

And this website https://www.missingmiddlearlington.net/insights/key-takeaways-from-the-county-board-work-session-on-missing-middle-housing specifically addresses increasing purchasing power for moderate income purchasers, but let’s be real, how will they compete with landlords who want to come scoop up and entire multiplex. There’s going to be a lot of money generated from upcoming and I’m not sure it will do much to help the people already struggling to buy a home here.

It may allow more opportunities to rent deeper into the suburban part of the county so there is that I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, no middle class families are moving into 4-plexes. Like everyone else, they want a SFH, not some lame townhouse with zero parking.

Adding density just brings in more young people, mostly those that used to live in DC but now want a bigger place to support WFH.

Yep.

And its fine to debate the merits of increasing the density, but its insulting to suggest families are going to be buying these 750k duplexes or condos. It will be young yuppies. Lets at least ne honest about that.

Middle-class families aren't going to move into unaffordable fourplexes, they are going to hold out for even more unaffordable detached houses?

But also those fourplexes are going to be loud because of all of the families living in them?

No... they are going to get their SFH where they can afford to! Like always.

No they don't always! What are you talking about? Many, many families around here live in townhouses or condos! Get out of your bubble.

Yes, yes they do.

But not at those price points.

I lived with my family in a townhouse too. It wasnt 750k.

The people, with families, paying 750k do not choose multi family.

PP here. In fact, I do live in a $800k townhouse in Arlington! Why? Because I couldn't afford a SFH in Arlington and yet I wanted to stay close in and didn't want to commute from an hour away. I certainly consider myself middle class. I don't know why this is unbelievable to you.

I'm glad that works for you.

I can't afford an 800k house, and if I could I would make a different choice, but good for you.

That is exactly the point. Someone is claiming that families won't buy missing middle housing because it will be so expensive that if they have that much money, they will choose a SFH farther away.

I'm here to say there are plenty of families like me who will pay that much to stay closer in! Everybody makes different choices.

No there is not. We lived as a family in a set of townhomes -- 40% were rich DINKs, 50% were group rental homes, 10% were families (ie us and a couple with a baby who were likely to move by the time the kid is walking).

Missing middle is all about increasing rental market supply.

It's weird you think your experience living in one particular townhouse community is representative of an entire demographic of middle income families.

I'm in Arlington and I can assure you that there are many kids here living in townhouses and condos in that middle range.

I’ve been through 3 complexes, and everyone the families leave by 4th grade of the oldest.

A lot of people move for more space when kids are young, but if you stick it out, eventually you no longer have a living room full of toys and you don't need a big yard because teens are always out and about.

- still living in townhouse with middle and high school kids

[Anonymous]

Sorry typos … a lot of money generated from upzoning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, no middle class families are moving into 4-plexes. Like everyone else, they want a SFH, not some lame townhouse with zero parking.

Adding density just brings in more young people, mostly those that used to live in DC but now want a bigger place to support WFH.

Yep.

And its fine to debate the merits of increasing the density, but its insulting to suggest families are going to be buying these 750k duplexes or condos. It will be young yuppies. Lets at least ne honest about that.

Middle-class families aren't going to move into unaffordable fourplexes, they are going to hold out for even more unaffordable detached houses?

But also those fourplexes are going to be loud because of all of the families living in them?

No... they are going to get their SFH where they can afford to! Like always.

No they don't always! What are you talking about? Many, many families around here live in townhouses or condos! Get out of your bubble.

Yes, yes they do.

But not at those price points.

I lived with my family in a townhouse too. It wasnt 750k.

The people, with families, paying 750k do not choose multi family.

PP here. In fact, I do live in a $800k townhouse in Arlington! Why? Because I couldn't afford a SFH in Arlington and yet I wanted to stay close in and didn't want to commute from an hour away. I certainly consider myself middle class. I don't know why this is unbelievable to you.

I'm glad that works for you.

I can't afford an 800k house, and if I could I would make a different choice, but good for you.

That is exactly the point. Someone is claiming that families won't buy missing middle housing because it will be so expensive that if they have that much money, they will choose a SFH farther away.

I'm here to say there are plenty of families like me who will pay that much to stay closer in! Everybody makes different choices.

No there is not. We lived as a family in a set of townhomes -- 40% were rich DINKs, 50% were group rental homes, 10% were families (ie us and a couple with a baby who were likely to move by the time the kid is walking).

Missing middle is all about increasing rental market supply.

Most households aren't families. To begin with, 28% of households are single-person households. Another 35% of households have 2 people. Among households that are families, only 40% have their own children under 18 living at home.

Is there something wrong with increasing rental market supply?

I thought a big part of missing middle was to help people priced out afford to buy in the county because the current housing is unaffordable to most buyers. Creating more landlords doesn’t necessarily seem like a worthwhile venture.

How about, afford to LIVE in the county? Creating more housing people can rent doesn't seem like a worthwhile venture?

But isn’t that already being done with large apartment buildings all over the county? Isn’t the old Ballston Macy’s becoming more apartments? It just doesn’t feel like there is a dearth of rentals in the county.

And this website https://www.missingmiddlearlington.net/insights/key-takeaways-from-the-county-board-work-session-on-missing-middle-housing specifically addresses increasing purchasing power for moderate income purchasers, but let’s be real, how will they compete with landlords who want to come scoop up and entire multiplex. There’s going to be a lot of money generated from upcoming and I’m not sure it will do much to help the people already struggling to buy a home here.

It may allow more opportunities to rent deeper into the suburban part of the county so there is that I guess.

Maybe not everyone who rents wants to live in a large apartment building?

Maybe not everyone wants to, or is able to, buy the residence they live in?

[Anonymous]

If approved, Is there a plan in place to accommodate the additional county residents with regard to libraries, public schools, rec centers, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as the whole "we need homes for teachers, and cops, etc"

OK, lets just run the numbers then.

a 750,000 duplex, condo, whatever , is a 600k mortgage. And thats asumming they can scare up 150 to get 20% down and avoid PMI.

Thats still 4k a month.

Who is swinging that? Not some GS12 and teacher partner.

Just call it what it is- upzoning. Greater density. It's not "missing middle", or middle class affordable. That couple is still going to buy a place for 550 somewhere way farther out.

Let's run the numbers. Right now, egg producers are only allowed to produce and sell two sizes of eggs: extra large eggs and small eggs. The middle class can't afford extra large eggs. In the future, however, egg producers will also be allowed to produce and sell "missing middle" eggs, so: extra large eggs, large eggs, medium eggs, and small eggs. In addition, more eggs will be available, total.

Will more people be able to afford eggs once egg producers are also allowed to produce and sell large eggs and medium eggs, and more eggs are available, total?

Youre ignoring my point.

So the 750k condo gets bought by... whomever can afford and chooses that. But it isnt the middle class the plan pretends it will be.

Will that help the overall macro housing shortage? Sure. But its being sold as a way to allow teachers and firefighters and whoever to live where they work. And that is patently false.

The word Middle in missing middle is not “middle class”. It literally refers to a type of housing stock that is missing - townhouses, 4 flats, and mid-rise buildings.

I lived for many years in Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights Ohio, suburbs of Cleveland that have some similarities to N Arlington (Shaker) and S Arlington (CH). I lived in neighborhoods that mixed walkable retail (Westover), townhouses or apartments above retail, large 1890-1940s Tudor and Victorian mansions, “regular” houses similar to the 1940s colonials, and 4-flat buildings with parking behind. It was no issue at all and lead to a vibrant, active neighborhood. Personally I would welcome more of that mix in my neighborhood.

Then why is every presentation about all these teachers, cops, etc, etc being able to live here? Just say what it is. We want to build 750k condos, that yuppies and retirees will live in. Upzone the crap out of these currently existing SFH neighborhoods, because that is what is good.

I'm reading in this very thread about how home health workers will be finally able to live in the neighborhood they work in.

So the missing middle proposal will decrease property values and cause undesirable people to move in, while also costing too much for the middle class? And it will also exacerbate school crowding while creating housing that families don't want to live in? Amazing.

Opponents simultaneously argue both sides. They oppose missing middle because it‘s not low income housing but also they don’t want developers to build more committed affordable units. They’re concerned about the tree canopy but also opposed to increasing tree canopy requirements for SFHs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stop distorting the market. Invest in public transportation. If employers really need workers to come to a wealthy enclave they’re going to have to pay for it. Let the market do its thing.

SFH zoning distorts the market

[Anonymous]

I hope Mike English is getting paid for this, man. Because he is on the clock 24/7. A true vigilante of yimby online discourse. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If approved, Is there a plan in place to accommodate the additional county residents with regard to libraries, public schools, rec centers, etc?

Nope. We’re supposed to be willing to sacrifice because reasons. More density will be objectively worse for current residents (it’s already very hard to get into camps and rec classes, there’s nowhere to build more schools without cannibalizing park land, etc) but we aren’t supposed to notice or care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eh. I live near Rocklands in Virginia Square. We have SFHs, duplexes, multiplexes, and apartment buildings all on the same square block. We are fine and living here is great. Not sure why people are so pissed off. Most of Arlington near the rosslyn-ballston corridor is already dense and we have vibrant neighborhoods with diverse housing options.

I lived in a similar neighborhood in another city. Walked to train. Same large city did have some single family neighborhoods as well as even denser areas plus acres or miles of old rowhouses.

I was sickened when relatives bought in ARL with this idiocy pending. Their mortgage-not mine. Here's an ARL Chainbridge forest property- deceptively a bi level- sold for about 1.01m and now a developer has a new build listed at 2.9m. ARL allows builders to go to max impervious surface so the downhill neighbor will or could get water?

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/4192-39th-St-N-22207/home/11230402?&utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=1023856&utm_term=aud-923999260716:dsa-1341488483656&utm_content=454669090002&adgid=111663012208&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI192BttXi_AIVh6_ICh3yiwlkEAAYASAAEgJSrvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds Lot is .23 acres or 10018.8 square feet so under missing middle it could be 3 townhouses or a 4 unit multiplex.

Assume 1 garage unit for each so for a typical couple that's 6 to 8 vehicles. Where would those cars park? If 3 townhouses the driveways would remove most on street in front of the lot. Pave the front for driveways? 4 garage spaces? Lots of teardowns in ARL get 1 car garages. 3 un its=3 and 4=4.

Bilevel entrance was a grade and new build is about 6-8 feet up-allows 3 levels- with main level walkout in back - lot slopes to street. Guess what? Back in late 2021 a non developer might have bought the place if it was 8 steps up to front door and a smaller 3 level colonial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we all just recognize this as a developer handout, rather than some legitimate government program, it's the only way it makes sense. Developers have always owned politicians in this area, and this is no different. One of the Arlington developers even got his 20-something daughter to write an article in some Washington magazine about how great MM would be. It was posted a while back in the Real Estate forum.

Who is handing what to developers? Please explain.

See my post on a property https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/4192-39th-St-N-22207/home/11230402?&utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=1023856&utm_term=aud-923999260716:dsa-1341488483656&utm_content=454669090002&adgid=111663012208&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI192BttXi_AIVh6_ICh3yiwlkEAAYASAAEgJSrvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

2.9 m for a single family. 4 units at 1700 sq feet . 2 bed + 3rd flex as bed/office/den and 2.5 baths. 800k*4=3.2m minimum.

[Anonymous]

Most families own too many cars, but we’re not allowed to go after that apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Maybe not everyone who rents wants to live in a large apartment building?

Maybe not everyone wants to, or is able to, buy the residence they live in?

And maybe not everyone wants to live in a dense setting and has deliberately chosen neighborhoods with SFH rather than living in Clarendon.

To the other PP, zero plans have been made to deal with infrastructure. The CB thinks schools are the SB's problem. They have no plans to provide funds for more schools, more parks or recreational fields. Nothing. CB cares about developers who want density. Period full stop.

I challenge everyone who supports missing middle, when the time comes, to sell their SFH for no more than $600K to provide greater affordable housing stock to those who can't afford your typical Arlington home. I don't care if you paid $200K for it 30yrs ago or $2M for it last year, when the time comes make it possible for a family to own property in Arlington. Put your own equity where your mouth is and don't screw your soon to be former neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Maybe not everyone who rents wants to live in a large apartment building?

Maybe not everyone wants to, or is able to, buy the residence they live in?

And maybe not everyone wants to live in a dense setting and has deliberately chosen neighborhoods with SFH rather than living in Clarendon.

To the other PP, zero plans have been made to deal with infrastructure. The CB thinks schools are the SB's problem. They have no plans to provide funds for more schools, more parks or recreational fields. Nothing. CB cares about developers who want density. Period full stop.

I challenge everyone who supports missing middle, when the time comes, to sell their SFH for no more than $600K to provide greater affordable housing stock to those who can't afford your typical Arlington home. I don't care if you paid $200K for it 30yrs ago or $2M for it last year, when the time comes make it possible for a family to own property in Arlington. Put your own equity where your mouth is and don't screw your soon to be former neighbors.

Well, things change. If you want to have the final say over the property you live next door to, you'd better buy that property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as the whole "we need homes for teachers, and cops, etc"

OK, lets just run the numbers then.

a 750,000 duplex, condo, whatever , is a 600k mortgage. And thats asumming they can scare up 150 to get 20% down and avoid PMI.

Thats still 4k a month.

Who is swinging that? Not some GS12 and teacher partner.

Just call it what it is- upzoning. Greater density. It's not "missing middle", or middle class affordable. That couple is still going to buy a place for 550 somewhere way farther out.

Let's run the numbers. Right now, egg producers are only allowed to produce and sell two sizes of eggs: extra large eggs and small eggs. The middle class can't afford extra large eggs. In the future, however, egg producers will also be allowed to produce and sell "missing middle" eggs, so: extra large eggs, large eggs, medium eggs, and small eggs. In addition, more eggs will be available, total.

Will more people be able to afford eggs once egg producers are also allowed to produce and sell large eggs and medium eggs, and more eggs are available, total?

Youre ignoring my point.

So the 750k condo gets bought by... whomever can afford and chooses that. But it isnt the middle class the plan pretends it will be.

Will that help the overall macro housing shortage? Sure. But its being sold as a way to allow teachers and firefighters and whoever to live where they work. And that is patently false.

The word Middle in missing middle is not “middle class”. It literally refers to a type of housing stock that is missing - townhouses, 4 flats, and mid-rise buildings.

I lived for many years in Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights Ohio, suburbs of Cleveland that have some similarities to N Arlington (Shaker) and S Arlington (CH). I lived in neighborhoods that mixed walkable retail (Westover), townhouses or apartments above retail, large 1890-1940s Tudor and Victorian mansions, “regular” houses similar to the 1940s colonials, and 4-flat buildings with parking behind. It was no issue at all and lead to a vibrant, active neighborhood. Personally I would welcome more of that mix in my neighborhood.

Then why is every presentation about all these teachers, cops, etc, etc being able to live here? Just say what it is. We want to build 750k condos, that yuppies and retirees will live in. Upzone the crap out of these currently existing SFH neighborhoods, because that is what is good.

I'm reading in this very thread about how home health workers will be finally able to live in the neighborhood they work in.

So the missing middle proposal will decrease property values and cause undesirable people to move in, while also costing too much for the middle class? And it will also exacerbate school crowding while creating housing that families don't want to live in? Amazing.

Opponents simultaneously argue both sides. They oppose missing middle because it‘s not low income housing but also they don’t want developers to build more committed affordable units. They’re concerned about the tree canopy but also opposed to increasing tree canopy requirements for SFHs.

I don’t know if I count as an opponent per se (I’m no fan of McMansions being the only housing type going forward), but I’m for a more thoughtful approach to this. I’m fine with more density close to transit (I’m 2 blocks from a metro station and have a good walk score, so I think my street could handle more density than other parts of the county where you’re going to have lots more people with cars). And as someone who owns an older home most of my value is in the land. So upzoning will likely be good for my property value). But I can already barely get my kids into summer camps without the system crashing. The Saturday rec spots that all the working parents want go fast. We went to the library over MLK weekend and it was an absolute zoo. The high schools around here are overcrowded.

The county needs to propose ways to account for more drivers (they want us to be “car light” which my 1 car family is, but also won’t acknowledge that is not possible without more transit throughout the suburban parts of the county). The county also needs to increase its already strained public services and schools. Otherwise this is just an opportunity for developers to make money and dump the fall out on taxpayers.

And I worry this could make the county more unaffordable. I’m someone who was able to eke in as a dual GS14 fed family. We bought an older but liveable home, lived in it a few years, and then renovated. We had to get into bidding wars to get our house. But now people who want to renovate older homes will be competing with developers who see the financial potential of multi family housing, so the land will get bid up even more. This will cause more smaller, older homes to get knocked down and create a new missing housing type. It will be McMansions and multi family. The only older homes that might be safe are those on a weird lot. But I guess I can cash out in 20 years b/c I have a nice flat lot near metro. So if I’m looking at this from a purely selfish perspective I should be for missing middle.