Missing Middle middle finger -- seller insists on SFH restriction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My area of Arlington has 40×150 lots. Explain to me how fitting a triplex or sixplex next door with my 8 ft side yard is not unfair.

I’m also in an R-6 neighborhood. Explain to me how the number of units in a building is different than being sandwiched between 2 new build SFH that are built right up to the maximum lot coverage?

The house in question is asking $1.2 for a teardown. That’s an expensive lot. To turn a profit, you have to build a $2.5-3M home or multiple units. Guess what? That $2-3M home will also tower over your modest house next door and shade the yard with a tall, narrow monstrosity of a home.

You truly can’t understand the difference between a single family house with 2 kids and a garage and apartment building?A minimum of 12 cars with 6 or less parking spaces. A dumpster of garbage placed right by your fence and 18 neighbors as opposed to 4. Enjoy!

I think everyone understands your life is (negatively) impacted by having a larger apartment next door to you, but come on. You’re acting like it is catastrophically impacting your quality of life. It really isn’t. Take one for the team. Your home will still appreciate.

I live two houses down from a high rise apartment building and across the street two houses down from another. I don’t even notice them. They don’t negatively impact my day to day existence in the least.

What Zip code? Do you spend a lot of time in your yard? Gardening? Reading? Do you mind being under those windows?

Not telling you that.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.

It is literally not even the slightest inconvenience.

Right that will narrow it down to your yard lolz.
Prolly 22201.
I personally don't enjoy eating or reading watched by overlooking strangers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s no history to preserve in Arlington. Anybody wanting to preserve history in Arlington is a NeoConfederate

I don't think the Balls were enslavers.
Bannecker Park isn't a neo Confederate shrine.
I am sure the Black Heritage Museum will realize the error of their ways.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My area of Arlington has 40×150 lots. Explain to me how fitting a triplex or sixplex next door with my 8 ft side yard is not unfair. [/quote]

I’m also in an R-6 neighborhood. Explain to me how the number of units in a building is different than being sandwiched between 2 new build SFH that are built right up to the maximum lot coverage?

The house in question is asking $1.2 for a teardown. That’s an expensive lot. To turn a profit, you have to build a $2.5-3M home or multiple units. Guess what? That $2-3M home will also tower over your modest house next door and shade the yard with a tall, narrow monstrosity of a home. [/quote]

You truly can’t understand the difference between a single family house with 2 kids and a garage and apartment building?A minimum of 12 cars with 6 or less parking spaces. A dumpster of garbage placed right by your fence and 18 neighbors as opposed to 4. Enjoy![/quote]

I think everyone understands your life is (negatively) impacted by having a larger apartment next door to you, but come on. You’re acting like it is catastrophically impacting your quality of life. It really isn’t. Take one for the team. Your home will still appreciate.[/quote]

I live two houses down from a high rise apartment building and across the street two houses down from another. I don’t even notice them. They don’t negatively impact my day to day existence in the least. [/quote]


What Zip code? Do you spend a lot of time in your yard? Gardening? Reading? Do you mind being under those windows?[/quote]

Not telling you that.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.

It is literally not even the slightest inconvenience. [/quote]


Right that will narrow it down to your yard lolz.
Prolly 22201.
I personally don't enjoy eating or reading watched by overlooking strangers.[/quote]

Why do you live where you do? You should just take all your money and move to a more suburban neighborhood where a car is mandatory to get around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had a deed restriction on home I sold and no one cared. In my opinion surprised.

I took a FEMA payout and State grant in Sandy to rebuild. Part of condition I had to legally put a deed restriction flood insurance must always be in place in house.

That means even mortgage free you need flood insurance and in event you drop it you are barred from any type of govt grant or could be penalties.

My house was in AE8 meaning 8 feet above sea level and house at elevation of 7. I had four feet of water in Sandy.

My buyer was 65 and said it was a once in a 100 year event I guess that is next buyers problem. He liked all new. And my flood insurance grandfather solely creeps up but that sky high insurance was 20 years away.

Those feed restrictions may not seem a problem but one day they will be but todays buyers don’t care

A deed restriction imposed by a government authority is different from a covenant that a seller wants to attach to a property and the local government has no interest in enforcing and would never impose on anyone (in fact, the local government is opposed to this covenant).

Same thing with declaring your house a historic house. Not only is there a non-profit that is in "charge" of making sure the home remains historic, you now are overseen by a government Historic Preservation Office.

BTW, getting your house designated historic doesn't necessarily stop a multi-family being built. Historic homes need to preserve the facade and the new structure has to abide by historic guidelines, but there are multiple instances where a multi-story building is essentially built on top of a historic home all with the approval of the historic preservation folks. Historic Districts don't have a hand in zoning which dictates use of the structure, height, etc.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My area of Arlington has 40×150 lots. Explain to me how fitting a triplex or sixplex next door with my 8 ft side yard is not unfair. [/quote]

I’m also in an R-6 neighborhood. Explain to me how the number of units in a building is different than being sandwiched between 2 new build SFH that are built right up to the maximum lot coverage?

The house in question is asking $1.2 for a teardown. That’s an expensive lot. To turn a profit, you have to build a $2.5-3M home or multiple units. Guess what? That $2-3M home will also tower over your modest house next door and shade the yard with a tall, narrow monstrosity of a home. [/quote]

You truly can’t understand the difference between a single family house with 2 kids and a garage and apartment building?A minimum of 12 cars with 6 or less parking spaces. A dumpster of garbage placed right by your fence and 18 neighbors as opposed to 4. Enjoy![/quote]

I think everyone understands your life is (negatively) impacted by having a larger apartment next door to you, but come on. You’re acting like it is catastrophically impacting your quality of life. It really isn’t. Take one for the team. Your home will still appreciate.[/quote]

I live two houses down from a high rise apartment building and across the street two houses down from another. I don’t even notice them. They don’t negatively impact my day to day existence in the least. [/quote]


What Zip code? Do you spend a lot of time in your yard? Gardening? Reading? Do you mind being under those windows?[/quote]

Not telling you that.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.

It is literally not even the slightest inconvenience. [/quote]


Right that will narrow it down to your yard lolz.
Prolly 22201.
I personally don't enjoy eating or reading watched by overlooking strangers.[/quote]

Why do you live where you do? You should just take all your money and move to a more suburban neighborhood where a car is mandatory to get around.[/quote]

We live where we bought our first house mid 80s. We chose it because of the quiet street, proximity to trails, walkability to Metro. Our yard and garden have become very lovely. We are emotionally attached to our home. It's not an investment It's a home.
Why don't you sell your house and buy up distressed properties and flip them to developers?

[Anonymous]

We live where we bought our first house mid 80s. We chose it because of the quiet street, proximity to trails, walkability to Metro. Our yard and garden have become very lovely. We are emotionally attached to our home. It's not an investment It's a home.
Why don't you sell your house and buy up distressed properties and flip them to developers?

I would love sell my home and flip it to a developer but I can’t afford to buy a home in a close in walkable to metro neighborhood because of folks like you refusing to allow new housing because of *gasp* the horror of a shadow or someone being able to see you from their window as you tend to your yard.

[Anonymous]

This can't possibly be enforceable.

But heck, if the seller wants to contract the world of people interested in dealing with this sale, that's their choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We live where we bought our first house mid 80s. We chose it because of the quiet street, proximity to trails, walkability to Metro. Our yard and garden have become very lovely. We are emotionally attached to our home. It's not an investment It's a home.
Why don't you sell your house and buy up distressed properties and flip them to developers?

I would love sell my home and flip it to a developer but I can’t afford to buy a home in a close in walkable to metro neighborhood because of folks like you refusing to allow new housing because of *gasp* the horror of a shadow or someone being able to see you from their window as you tend to your yard.

Well we can't sell our home and buy one for cash anywhere walkable either. But really you just are pi$$ed off Boomers are not dying or moving to nursing homes fast enough to free up our housing stock, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Well we can't sell our home and buy one for cash anywhere walkable either. But really you just are pi$$ed off Boomers are not dying or moving to nursing homes fast enough to free up our housing stock, right?

I'm a huge proponent of aging in place. I think it is great! You made a great decision back in the 80's to buy in a lovely neighborhood, and I'm sure your lot and home have appreciated significantly as a result. Maybe you don't care about that- the appreciation is stuck in the home and anywhere else of interest to you has also appreciated so net net, just stay put. Fine, makes sense. But don't ruin it for everyone else because of your desire to preserve and keep your street exactly how it is. Your life will still be idyllic and lovely next door to a multi-family property. And what do you think is really going to happen on this lot anyways even if it stays as a SFH? I think you'll still get the shadows that you fear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love to see it. “Missing middle” serves to enrich developers and nothing more. Hopefully people have begun to recognize that.

Agree. I'm over developers ruining neighborhoods.

Ah yes, your home was built by...whom?

The original owner in 1892.

That’s great but like 95% of the homes built in the late 19th century at least in DC were built by developers. Literally they did it to restrict any undesirables buying land and building something themselves.

From Arlington Wikipedia entry:

"In 1900, Blacks were more than a third of Arlington County's population. Over the course of the century, the Black population dwindled. Neighborhoods in Arlington set up racial covenants and forbade Blacks from owning or domiciling property.[21][22] In 1938, Arlington banned row houses, a type of housing that was heavily used by Black residents. By October 1942, not a single rental unit was available in the county.[23] In the 1940s, the federal government evicted black neighborhoods to build the Pentagon and make room for highway construction.[21]"

Another proof that the most horrible racist laws and rules were started in Virginia.

Actually that would be New York, especially the co-ops where the nice liberals live so that they can control who buys in the buildings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not good, that area needs more housing and more affordable than what SFHs fetch there.

As soon as they line Langston Blvd. with affordable rental apartments, Lyon Village will revert to where it was in the 1960s and 1970s -- group houses for Georgetown students, owned by batty people who inherited the house from their granny, and GS 12s who could afford to live in the houses because they need so much work.

Do you mean market rate apartments or Affordable Housing? As a practical
matter, nobody can build 100 percent Affordable Housing complexes (CAFs) in places where they don't already exist. Where these type of buildings already exist, they can be redeveloped to include more units. But any new buildings that aren't currently Affordable Housing buildings with a will be luxury rentals with a paltry amount of Affordable units sprinkled in (if this ever even happens, which for a variety of reasons, is unlikely as proposed).

What do you think they are doing with the apartments at the end of Cleveland St. off Langston or the Leckie mid rise buildings behind the Lee Heights shops off Langston?

Are you saying they are redeveloping market rate apartments as a CAF?

They are but market rate. They are bus CAFs and will be redeveloped with more CAFs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My area of Arlington has 40×150 lots. Explain to me how fitting a triplex or sixplex next door with my 8 ft side yard is not unfair.

I’m also in an R-6 neighborhood. Explain to me how the number of units in a building is different than being sandwiched between 2 new build SFH that are built right up to the maximum lot coverage?

The house in question is asking $1.2 for a teardown. That’s an expensive lot. To turn a profit, you have to build a $2.5-3M home or multiple units. Guess what? That $2-3M home will also tower over your modest house next door and shade the yard with a tall, narrow monstrosity of a home.

You truly can’t understand the difference between a single family house with 2 kids and a garage and apartment building?A minimum of 12 cars with 6 or less parking spaces. A dumpster of garbage placed right by your fence and 18 neighbors as opposed to 4. Enjoy!

I think everyone understands your life is (negatively) impacted by having a larger apartment next door to you, but come on. You’re acting like it is catastrophically impacting your quality of life. It really isn’t. Take one for the team. Your home will still appreciate.

I live two houses down from a high rise apartment building and across the street two houses down from another. I don’t even notice them. They don’t negatively impact my day to day existence in the least.

What Zip code? Do you spend a lot of time in your yard? Gardening? Reading? Do you mind being under those windows?

Not telling you that.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.

It is literally not even the slightest inconvenience.

22204

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not good, that area needs more housing and more affordable than what SFHs fetch there.

As soon as they line Langston Blvd. with affordable rental apartments, Lyon Village will revert to where it was in the 1960s and 1970s -- group houses for Georgetown students, owned by batty people who inherited the house from their granny, and GS 12s who could afford to live in the houses because they need so much work.

Do you mean market rate apartments or Affordable Housing? As a practical
matter, nobody can build 100 percent Affordable Housing complexes (CAFs) in places where they don't already exist. Where these type of buildings already exist, they can be redeveloped to include more units. But any new buildings that aren't currently Affordable Housing buildings with a will be luxury rentals with a paltry amount of Affordable units sprinkled in (if this ever even happens, which for a variety of reasons, is unlikely as proposed).

What do you think they are doing with the apartments at the end of Cleveland St. off Langston or the Leckie mid rise buildings behind the Lee Heights shops off Langston?

Are you saying they are redeveloping market rate apartments as a CAF?

They are but market rate. They are bus CAFs and will be redeveloped with more CAFs

Which is exactly what was said in the post upthread that you replied to. CAFs will be redeveloped, but they can't line Langston with CAFs. Everything else will be luxury apartments with a handful of affordable units sprinkled in. A truly paltry number that the County will frame as a community benefit worthy of additional height.

[Anonymous]

thats a tiny lot!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:thats a tiny lot!!!

The county has already approved 6 plexes on 6000ish SF lots.