Arlington losing families

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fed with a teacher spouse. We bought a house in Arlington last year for around 1.2. A new build in the 2-3 million range will never be an option for us so older smaller house it is. If MM had been further along in the process and there were more options available we definitely would have looked at townhouses / duplexes in that range. The issue right now is location of available townhouses, and design. There are some nice looking new build townhouses in single family neighborhoods but they are in some of the least desirable parts of South Arlington. As far as design alot of them are super narrow, no yard, don't have 3 bedrooms on the same floor, ect. If MM could lead to more townhouse/duplex housing in desirable neighborhoods that are designed with families in mind, that could be a boon to working families. But that housing stock isn't really out there yet!

The way MM is structured developers are incentivized to squeeze the most units possible onto a lot so no MM developments are going to meet your definition of family friendly. They'll be super narrow, may be squeezed onto different floors, have no yard, insufficient parking, have too few bedrooms, etc.

The unit/lot size/coverage ratio isn't set up for building units that would appeal to families. Those numbers were set to maximize developer profits.

How so? Those could be the most profitable? Or some other incentive?

More units + more sq ft = more money. Just like developers build every single new build to the maximum lot coverage, even if some families would actually like a real backyard or trees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL you think people move because they're concerned about rigor in schools?

What a clown you are.

This is NOT a way normal people think.

np.. We must be clowns.

We moved out of a wealthy Bay Area neighborhood because the school district lacked any gifted programs. That was not the only reason, though. We were priced out.

It galled me that we were paying so much in property taxes for so little return in the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better alternative to MM would be for the county to offer downpayment assistance or low interest loans to county employees making under a certain HHI. This would enable schoolteachers, law enforcement officers, etc. to actually live in Arlington. MM seems more like a boon to developers rather than a targeted path to homeownership for truly middle class folks.

A low interest loan still isn't going to allow a schoolteacher to afford a 1.5 million house. Get some perspective.

This. Unless downpayment assistance means the county paying for 75% of the house, no teachers are moving into single family homes in Arlington

Are you assuming the teacher is the sole income earner? Then no. But this thread is discussing families, which in many close in suburbs includes two working parents.

Fine. A teacher and a government worker. $1.5 million is still a ton of money for them (and out of their reach). You have no perspective.

So MM is the answer then? Because those houses are fairly unaffordable to middle class people too. The only difference is that the builders are getting rich and buying the new $3M houses in 22207.

Perhaps you’re the one missing perspective.

That wasn't the question. Keep up. The question was whether subsidized down payments or low interest loans are the solution.

I think you should reread the initial post and work on your comprehension. The premise was that those options are better alternatives for incentivizing for middle class families than MM. Then MM advocates accused me of “lacking perspective” because poor lowly teachers could in no way afford a $1.5 million house. As if a single parent teacher and the $1.5 million house are the only possible purchaser and housing option in Arlington.

MM cheerleaders are so delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

Yes to all of this. Materials costs and economies of scale incentivize development of higher density units rather than SFHs. If they get tax breaks, so much the better. Meanwhile SFH stock is declining and prices are soaring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better alternative to MM would be for the county to offer downpayment assistance or low interest loans to county employees making under a certain HHI. This would enable schoolteachers, law enforcement officers, etc. to actually live in Arlington. MM seems more like a boon to developers rather than a targeted path to homeownership for truly middle class folks.

A low interest loan still isn't going to allow a schoolteacher to afford a 1.5 million house. Get some perspective.

This. Unless downpayment assistance means the county paying for 75% of the house, no teachers are moving into single family homes in Arlington

Are you assuming the teacher is the sole income earner? Then no. But this thread is discussing families, which in many close in suburbs includes two working parents.

Fine. A teacher and a government worker. $1.5 million is still a ton of money for them (and out of their reach). You have no perspective.

So MM is the answer then? Because those houses are fairly unaffordable to middle class people too. The only difference is that the builders are getting rich and buying the new $3M houses in 22207.

Perhaps you’re the one missing perspective.

That wasn't the question. Keep up. The question was whether subsidized down payments or low interest loans are the solution.

I think you should reread the initial post and work on your comprehension. The premise was that those options are better alternatives for incentivizing for middle class families than MM. Then MM advocates accused me of “lacking perspective” because poor lowly teachers could in no way afford a $1.5 million house. As if a single parent teacher and the $1.5 million house are the only possible purchaser and housing option in Arlington.

MM cheerleaders are so delusional.

But they're plainly not better alternatives. They are in fact terrible and pointless alternatives that won't help at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fed with a teacher spouse. We bought a house in Arlington last year for around 1.2. A new build in the 2-3 million range will never be an option for us so older smaller house it is. If MM had been further along in the process and there were more options available we definitely would have looked at townhouses / duplexes in that range. The issue right now is location of available townhouses, and design. There are some nice looking new build townhouses in single family neighborhoods but they are in some of the least desirable parts of South Arlington. As far as design alot of them are super narrow, no yard, don't have 3 bedrooms on the same floor, ect. If MM could lead to more townhouse/duplex housing in desirable neighborhoods that are designed with families in mind, that could be a boon to working families. But that housing stock isn't really out there yet!

This right here is the issue. People can afford Arlington, but not the part of Arlington they want to live in. I hope I'm not extrapolating too much, but if PP has kids, this means a TEACHER isn't willing to send their kids to school in South Arlington. The MM was always about people getting into North Arlington, even if they could already afford South Arlington. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but this is the REAL problem many proponents were trying to solve for...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

How would these units ever sell for 1M? A 6 plex will include relatively small units in a building with no amenities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

How would these units ever sell for 1M? A 6 plex will include relatively small units in a building with no amenities.

So then they won’t be as profitable for builders?

Either the market supports them or they don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

How would these units ever sell for 1M? A 6 plex will include relatively small units in a building with no amenities.

So then they won’t be as profitable for builders?

Either the market supports them or they don’t.

Actually, I don't understand the economics of why MM is incentivizing 6-plexes where possible. Say each unit rents out for 2500/month, that's 180K/year in cash flow. Net operating income is probably 2/3rds of that? So 120K/year. At a current cap rate of 5% for multifamily, that's a $2.4MM property. That's what a developer could sell a new construction SFH for anyway. So why not do that instead? Can someone explain?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

How would these units ever sell for 1M? A 6 plex will include relatively small units in a building with no amenities.

So then they won’t be as profitable for builders?

Either the market supports them or they don’t.

Actually, I don't understand the economics of why MM is incentivizing 6-plexes where possible. Say each unit rents out for 2500/month, that's 180K/year in cash flow. Net operating income is probably 2/3rds of that? So 120K/year. At a current cap rate of 5% for multifamily, that's a $2.4MM property. That's what a developer could sell a new construction SFH for anyway. So why not do that instead? Can someone explain?

The developer is selling the MM complex to investors so the developer isn't holding them. At least some of the investors need passive income for tax purposes. I don't know what other circumstances lead to the development of 6 plexes, but this is one example that I know of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Builders are already pumping out $2M+ SFHs. Letting them produce some less expensive housing options is not a bad thing.

Because Arlington needs more $1m condos.

If people buy/rent them, then yes. If the market doesn’t pan out then the builders will go back to SFHs.

I think there is a market for cheaper homes in the “better” school districts. Imagine some THs over by Discovery.

No, they won't got back. A six unit building would be $6m if each sells for $1m vs a single family house that would be $2.5m. They can discount the units in the 6-plex a ton before ever getting close to the profit they get from a SFH. Developers are incentivized to build as much as they can get away with. They'll build the most sq ft and largest number of units approved for each lot, which does not work out to family friendly units.

So then maybe we do need more $1m condos if the builders can sell them.

How would these units ever sell for 1M? A 6 plex will include relatively small units in a building with no amenities.

So then they won’t be as profitable for builders?

Either the market supports them or they don’t.

Actually, I don't understand the economics of why MM is incentivizing 6-plexes where possible. Say each unit rents out for 2500/month, that's 180K/year in cash flow. Net operating income is probably 2/3rds of that? So 120K/year. At a current cap rate of 5% for multifamily, that's a $2.4MM property. That's what a developer could sell a new construction SFH for anyway. So why not do that instead? Can someone explain?

$2500/month is really low. My guess is $2750-$3000 for a 1 bedroom, $3750-$4000 for a 2 bedroom. Maybe even more. It's new construction so the units will command high rents.