Alexandria on the Cusp of Eliminating All SFH Zoning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

This!

You know what pays for all the stuff you want, OP? Property tax dollars. From incremental smart development like the ones in this package of reforms.

You can keep your SFH but when you go to sell it, it may sell for more because there will be more options for what it can become, and that will lead to both more tax dollars and more residents as one large house becomes four smaller ones in some places, especially places that support transit. Win-win-win-win.

NP here. I thought the entire premise of upzoning is that it will increase the supply of “affordable” housing and decrease the average price of housing, thereby making housing more affordable. At least that’s what several members of city council ran on and the mayor has been pushing. And now PP is claiming that upzoning is for increasing the collected real property taxes.

Which is it?

The entire premise of zoning changes to allow a wider range of housing types is: to allow a wider range of housing types. This will have many benefits.

A wide range of housing types is already available. What are these “benefits” of eliminating SFH zoning in Alexandria?

1. More housing
2. more tax revenue
3. higher property values for existing owners

4. More smaller landlords who are unlikely to properly maintain the properties.

Let’s be honest, that’s the real problem. When you are taking about quadplexes you are taking about renters and landlords. Not the type of landlords that maintain large complexes, but the type who are more likely to maintain older residential properties with little exterior maintenance or care for the neighbors to the property. That’s this issue. And it’s rarely an issue who rents the property but who maintains its.

But these would be new residential properties...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Forcing newly retired seniors out is what happened in Falls Church many years ago. It was sad. But people these days don’t care about anyone 50+. They just want them to die.

This honestly would be an ideal outcome. I support whatever zoning changes send the elderly packing. Retired seniors are a blight on SFH or dense TH neighborhoods. They're crotchety, noise sensitive, impatient with young kids, and kill the vibe of wherever they park themselves till they expire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

Oh, yes. Don't worry, no one will force demotion of your single family house.

What this means is that if you live on a street currently zoned for single family homes, your neighbor can sell their house to a developer who could throw up a multistory, multiunit apartment building as a matter of right.. There would be no review, no consideration of impacts, and no process in which you can submit a comment.

This is false and misleading.

The proposal allows up to 4-plexes on what would currently be single family lots, and they can't be any bigger than the single family home you would otherwise have been able to build there.

I get why you're lying, because the thing I just described simply isn't scary enough to gin up the fear you need to get people to oppose it. But you need to stop.

That is not a lie. A developer can build a multistory, multi unit complex by right. Yes, it cannot be larger than the FAR, setback and height limits that were expanded over the years, but that doesn’t negate the fact that such a building will be allowed by right. Or that most homes are currently built to the max allowed by right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

This!

You know what pays for all the stuff you want, OP? Property tax dollars. From incremental smart development like the ones in this package of reforms.

You can keep your SFH but when you go to sell it, it may sell for more because there will be more options for what it can become, and that will lead to both more tax dollars and more residents as one large house becomes four smaller ones in some places, especially places that support transit. Win-win-win-win.

NP here. I thought the entire premise of upzoning is that it will increase the supply of “affordable” housing and decrease the average price of housing, thereby making housing more affordable. At least that’s what several members of city council ran on and the mayor has been pushing. And now PP is claiming that upzoning is for increasing the collected real property taxes.

Which is it?

The entire premise of zoning changes to allow a wider range of housing types is: to allow a wider range of housing types. This will have many benefits.

A wide range of housing types is already available. What are these “benefits” of eliminating SFH zoning in Alexandria?

1. More housing
2. more tax revenue
3. higher property values for existing owners

4. More smaller landlords who are unlikely to properly maintain the properties.

Let’s be honest, that’s the real problem. When you are taking about quadplexes you are taking about renters and landlords. Not the type of landlords that maintain large complexes, but the type who are more likely to maintain older residential properties with little exterior maintenance or care for the neighbors to the property. That’s this issue. And it’s rarely an issue who rents the property but who maintains its.

But these would be new residential properties...

For now. And 10 years from now?

I have kids in college in nice, newer quadplexes that my kids have to beg to be maintained. Two different colleges in nice areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Forcing newly retired seniors out is what happened in Falls Church many years ago. It was sad. But people these days don’t care about anyone 50+. They just want them to die.

This honestly would be an ideal outcome. I support whatever zoning changes send the elderly packing. Retired seniors are a blight on SFH or dense TH neighborhoods. They're crotchety, noise sensitive, impatient with young kids, and kill the vibe of wherever they park themselves till they expire.

Let’s kick out the disabled and minorities too while we’re at it. OMFG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey, you voted for it. Reap the rewards.

No we did not. Despite the disingenuous claims of Wilson, Gaskins and McPike, these zoning changes were in no way discussed during the last election. Committed affordable housing was a huge discussion and rising housing costs across the metro area were discussed. But these proposals were not discussed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

Great, so our neighbors can build condos next to our bedrooms and destroy the single family neighborhood we love.

So let's play this out....

There is a neighborhood of say 100 homes. How many of those owners do you think will sell in the next ten years? Of those, how many do you think are currently "tear down" such that it is more palatable for a developer to purchase than for a new family to move in? Of those, how many have lots large enough to put in more than a duplex? And if they were to build that duplex, how likely is it that it would be any larger than a huge house that would otherwise be built?

The sky is not falling.

In my neighborhood there are $700k houses that are tear downs or $1.4 million dollar mc mansions. And every $700k house sold recently has been torn down.

Which neighborhood?

[Anonymous]

The Builders Associations are a huge lobbying force.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

This!

You know what pays for all the stuff you want, OP? Property tax dollars. From incremental smart development like the ones in this package of reforms.

You can keep your SFH but when you go to sell it, it may sell for more because there will be more options for what it can become, and that will lead to both more tax dollars and more residents as one large house becomes four smaller ones in some places, especially places that support transit. Win-win-win-win.

NP here. I thought the entire premise of upzoning is that it will increase the supply of “affordable” housing and decrease the average price of housing, thereby making housing more affordable. At least that’s what several members of city council ran on and the mayor has been pushing. And now PP is claiming that upzoning is for increasing the collected real property taxes.

Which is it?

The entire premise of zoning changes to allow a wider range of housing types is: to allow a wider range of housing types. This will have many benefits.

A wide range of housing types is already available. What are these “benefits” of eliminating SFH zoning in Alexandria?

1. More housing
2. more tax revenue
3. higher property values for existing owners

4. More smaller landlords who are unlikely to properly maintain the properties.

Let’s be honest, that’s the real problem. When you are taking about quadplexes you are taking about renters and landlords. Not the type of landlords that maintain large complexes, but the type who are more likely to maintain older residential properties with little exterior maintenance or care for the neighbors to the property. That’s this issue. And it’s rarely an issue who rents the property but who maintains its.

But these would be new residential properties...

For now. And 10 years from now?

I have kids in college in nice, newer quadplexes that my kids have to beg to be maintained. Two different colleges in nice areas.

Ten years from now, they will be ten-year-old residential properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Huge SFHs are already replacing bungalows in Del Ray. This zoning change just makes it possible to replace them with something other than giant SFHs. Do nothing and it will all be McMansions. As the PP stated, the mix of housing is why Del Ray is so popular - and because it's currently illegal to replicate that style of living elsewhere, so expensive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

The developers have more options and the economy of scale favors apartment buildings so that's what will be built. If you bought a SFH in a neighborhood of SFHs, tough luck. This will destroy the charm of Del Ray.

But Del Ray is already one of the most architecturally diverse areas in the city. You can have an apartment complex next to single family homes next to a duplex. It's one of the few things that I find appealing about Del Ray.

Del Ray is popular because of The Avenue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

Oh, yes. Don't worry, no one will force demotion of your single family house.

What this means is that if you live on a street currently zoned for single family homes, your neighbor can sell their house to a developer who could throw up a multistory, multiunit apartment building as a matter of right.. There would be no review, no consideration of impacts, and no process in which you can submit a comment.

This is false and misleading.

The proposal allows up to 4-plexes on what would currently be single family lots, and they can't be any bigger than the single family home you would otherwise have been able to build there.

I get why you're lying, because the thing I just described simply isn't scary enough to gin up the fear you need to get people to oppose it. But you need to stop.

You are a bald faced liar.

Go look at 316 E. Monroe right now. Old colonial was scraped from the lot last week and they are currently putting TWO, 4 bedroom houses on the lot. These guys saw the writing on the wall and jumped the gun by a week.

That's terrible! You should definitely file a complaint with code enforcement!

Oops, no, wait, they actually have a permit, applied for on August 22, 2023, and issued on October 5, 2023, for building a new duplex with ADU. The current zoning is R 2-5.

Do you not count 2 duplexes as two housing units? I sure do. And the addition of an ADU now means .... a lot that once had 3 or 4 people and 1 or 2 cars, now will have ~9 people and 8 cars. In what world does the neighbor want that?

Couple things here.

1. What is happening is already allowed under current zoning.
2. Your math/assumptions don’t make any sense. Why would one SFH have 1/2 cars but a second would jump to 8 cars?
3. Why do you think that what a neighbor wants should dictate this situation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

Oh, yes. Don't worry, no one will force demotion of your single family house.

What this means is that if you live on a street currently zoned for single family homes, your neighbor can sell their house to a developer who could throw up a multistory, multiunit apartment building as a matter of right.. There would be no review, no consideration of impacts, and no process in which you can submit a comment.

This is false and misleading.

The proposal allows up to 4-plexes on what would currently be single family lots, and they can't be any bigger than the single family home you would otherwise have been able to build there.

I get why you're lying, because the thing I just described simply isn't scary enough to gin up the fear you need to get people to oppose it. But you need to stop.

That is not a lie. A developer can build a multistory, multi unit complex by right. Yes, it cannot be larger than the FAR, setback and height limits that were expanded over the years, but that doesn’t negate the fact that such a building will be allowed by right. Or that most homes are currently built to the max allowed by right.

For example, a two-story house-sized building with two units. Or even a two-story house-sized building with four units! Which sounds much, much scarier than a two-story house-sized building with one unit, because ... well, I don't really know why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

This!

You know what pays for all the stuff you want, OP? Property tax dollars. From incremental smart development like the ones in this package of reforms.

You can keep your SFH but when you go to sell it, it may sell for more because there will be more options for what it can become, and that will lead to both more tax dollars and more residents as one large house becomes four smaller ones in some places, especially places that support transit. Win-win-win-win.

NP here. I thought the entire premise of upzoning is that it will increase the supply of “affordable” housing and decrease the average price of housing, thereby making housing more affordable. At least that’s what several members of city council ran on and the mayor has been pushing. And now PP is claiming that upzoning is for increasing the collected real property taxes.

Which is it?

The entire premise of zoning changes to allow a wider range of housing types is: to allow a wider range of housing types. This will have many benefits.

A wide range of housing types is already available. What are these “benefits” of eliminating SFH zoning in Alexandria?

1. More housing
2. more tax revenue
3. higher property values for existing owners

4. More smaller landlords who are unlikely to properly maintain the properties.

Let’s be honest, that’s the real problem. When you are taking about quadplexes you are taking about renters and landlords. Not the type of landlords that maintain large complexes, but the type who are more likely to maintain older residential properties with little exterior maintenance or care for the neighbors to the property. That’s this issue. And it’s rarely an issue who rents the property but who maintains its.

But these would be new residential properties...

For now. And 10 years from now?

I have kids in college in nice, newer quadplexes that my kids have to beg to be maintained. Two different colleges in nice areas.

Ten years from now, they will be ten-year-old residential properties.

No sh!t. That wasn’t the point and you know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Failing schools, imploding commercial real estate, and murders are not quite enough to destroy Alexandria, so the Council is a freight train about to vote on Tuesday to eliminate all SFH zoning. Yay.

Hooray!

Don't worry, OP, they are not eliminating detached one-unit residential buildings. They are simply eliminating zoning that bans everything except detached one-unit residential buildings. Property owners - like you - will now have more options for your property.

This!

You know what pays for all the stuff you want, OP? Property tax dollars. From incremental smart development like the ones in this package of reforms.

You can keep your SFH but when you go to sell it, it may sell for more because there will be more options for what it can become, and that will lead to both more tax dollars and more residents as one large house becomes four smaller ones in some places, especially places that support transit. Win-win-win-win.

NP here. I thought the entire premise of upzoning is that it will increase the supply of “affordable” housing and decrease the average price of housing, thereby making housing more affordable. At least that’s what several members of city council ran on and the mayor has been pushing. And now PP is claiming that upzoning is for increasing the collected real property taxes.

Which is it?

The entire premise of zoning changes to allow a wider range of housing types is: to allow a wider range of housing types. This will have many benefits.

A wide range of housing types is already available. What are these “benefits” of eliminating SFH zoning in Alexandria?

1. More housing
2. more tax revenue
3. higher property values for existing owners

4. More smaller landlords who are unlikely to properly maintain the properties.

Let’s be honest, that’s the real problem. When you are taking about quadplexes you are taking about renters and landlords. Not the type of landlords that maintain large complexes, but the type who are more likely to maintain older residential properties with little exterior maintenance or care for the neighbors to the property. That’s this issue. And it’s rarely an issue who rents the property but who maintains its.

But these would be new residential properties...

For now. And 10 years from now?

I have kids in college in nice, newer quadplexes that my kids have to beg to be maintained. Two different colleges in nice areas.

I live in a Division I college town. Single family home neighborhoods are being destroyed by the new laws that have passed that allow the new quadplexes. Parking is an extreme problem. The homeowners in the neighborhoods do not want quadraplexes. The rentals are expensive. No way do they provide affordable housing.

The builders association lobbied for the change. There is no land available near the college to build on so they are destroying existing single family developments to build the quadplexes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is going to want to buy a $2M single family house next to an small apartment building with affordable housing?

Oh, right ALL of you who voted for this.

Have fun!

So the zoning reform will result in affordable housing? Great news!

City needs to add affordable housing on school grounds back on their list of priorities. Now is the time to be bold and act! Put those 100 unit buildings at George Mason Elementary next year.

Haha. They can’t even afford to rebuild that school. That’s not happening.