Arlington Missing Middle Housing Q&A

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs buyers when you can rent to recent grads at $2,500-3,000/month

I think that is a valid point

I don’t understand why a typical developer would decide to build and manage small properties. It makes more sense to sell the units. It’s possible one person would buy all the units and rent them out just as it’s possible for one person to own multiple homes and rent them out now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a wonder to watch some of the most privileged in our society clothe themselves in rightousness as they pull the ladder up behind them.

Nobody is pulling the ladder up. Nobody has asked for stricter zoning. Some people want no or fewer changes than what is being proposed. It’s pretty normal for people to like their neighborhood as-is. You may disagree, and you sound unhappy, and that’s ok, but nobody is personally trying to make it harder to live in Arlington. It is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a wonder to watch some of the most privileged in our society clothe themselves in rightousness as they pull the ladder up behind them.

I think this is very unfair. Nowhere in the entire United States has the type of reforms proposed in Arlington. Of course people who have worked hard to make their homes here are worried. This is an extreme proposal and it should (but will not) be dialed back to try and thread the needle in a way that balances things out and recognizes the infrastructure issues. We can have change without going nuclear.

I think this is very delusional. Try slumming it one day and drive through South Arlington. Plenty of examples that have been there for decades now. South Glebe Rd - they just slapped up some more oluxury townhouses on a little slip of land located across the street from a couple of apartment buildings, and then across the road there is a small infill build of large luxury SFH houses from about 10 years ago, a couple duplexes next to that, then next to that shoehorned in on some awkward strip another set of townhouses that are about 15 years old. Tons of small SFH homes behind that. Across the street a hand full of infill build townhomes from a decade ago then next to that some habit for humanity townhomes also from a 12+ yrs ago and next to that this small little apartment building that has seriously been there forever but recently got repainted and I think some renovations. Oh wait I forget that one SFH with what appears to be junkyard that grows in the front yard. All that infill building and people happily purchased those homes at very high prices. Those people worked hard to make their homes here. There is absolutely nothing extreme about this proposal because it already happens. They are just making sure it happens more places.

I don't know if people like you are really this dumb but you do realize that only certain lots are going to be useful for a developer. Duplexes and tri plexes might be ok for an individual home builder but actual developer companies want something that will be a community. That's their business. They don't build one off houses. So the actual number of lots that are going to meet that need in North Arlington that they can buy at a cost that will allow them to recoup their investment is pretty limited. They aren't going to bother to buy SFHs to tear down to replace. It's too costly in terms of dollars and time. They might take down a single small house but what they really want is land and no existing building. It's quicker and less costly. Remember they deal in volume. Now the smaller home builders, They might do the duplex but maybe not. It's a different kind of build verses one single family home. There is a start up cost if the builder isn't already in that space that might be too costly and time consuming to consider. Two smaller SFH on the same lot is more likely. What is not likely is that any of those home will be substantially less in cost that any other home in the neighborhood. They will be slightly less but not much less. And "affordable housing" ?? Forget it. Too expensive to deal with unless someone gives them the house and a substantial lot for free. Even with tax credits that can't offset the cost enough to make it profitable.

I am familiar with South Arlington. I have lived there in the past, and I have friends who have lived there. Most of the information in your post above is patently false. Another poster has already pointed this out.

And it was one of the reasons we didn't buy our home in S.Arlington.

I liked the cohesiveness and SFHs only of our neighborhood. We lived in some very questionable places in our 20s-early 30s to be able to afford a home in our 40s.

Now they want to transform the home/neighborhood we worked very, very hard to purchase into something else entirely. The thought that we could have mini apartment buildings/multi units as direct neighbors and throughout our neighborhood was not something we ever thought was ever on the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That would be a pretty shocking bait and switch. Everything I can find on the subject is touting the MMH's adherence to SFH standards (other than reduced parking and larger max size for 5-8 unit buildings - go from 6,000 to 8,000sf)

Ummm that is how the County Board has always operated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a wonder to watch some of the most privileged in our society clothe themselves in rightousness as they pull the ladder up behind them.

I think this is very unfair. Nowhere in the entire United States has the type of reforms proposed in Arlington. Of course people who have worked hard to make their homes here are worried. This is an extreme proposal and it should (but will not) be dialed back to try and thread the needle in a way that balances things out and recognizes the infrastructure issues. We can have change without going nuclear.

I think this is very delusional. Try slumming it one day and drive through South Arlington. Plenty of examples that have been there for decades now. South Glebe Rd - they just slapped up some more oluxury townhouses on a little slip of land located across the street from a couple of apartment buildings, and then across the road there is a small infill build of large luxury SFH houses from about 10 years ago, a couple duplexes next to that, then next to that shoehorned in on some awkward strip another set of townhouses that are about 15 years old. Tons of small SFH homes behind that. Across the street a hand full of infill build townhomes from a decade ago then next to that some habit for humanity townhomes also from a 12+ yrs ago and next to that this small little apartment building that has seriously been there forever but recently got repainted and I think some renovations. Oh wait I forget that one SFH with what appears to be junkyard that grows in the front yard. All that infill building and people happily purchased those homes at very high prices. Those people worked hard to make their homes here. There is absolutely nothing extreme about this proposal because it already happens. They are just making sure it happens more places.

I don't know if people like you are really this dumb but you do realize that only certain lots are going to be useful for a developer. Duplexes and tri plexes might be ok for an individual home builder but actual developer companies want something that will be a community. That's their business. They don't build one off houses. So the actual number of lots that are going to meet that need in North Arlington that they can buy at a cost that will allow them to recoup their investment is pretty limited. They aren't going to bother to buy SFHs to tear down to replace. It's too costly in terms of dollars and time. They might take down a single small house but what they really want is land and no existing building. It's quicker and less costly. Remember they deal in volume. Now the smaller home builders, They might do the duplex but maybe not. It's a different kind of build verses one single family home. There is a start up cost if the builder isn't already in that space that might be too costly and time consuming to consider. Two smaller SFH on the same lot is more likely. What is not likely is that any of those home will be substantially less in cost that any other home in the neighborhood. They will be slightly less but not much less. And "affordable housing" ?? Forget it. Too expensive to deal with unless someone gives them the house and a substantial lot for free. Even with tax credits that can't offset the cost enough to make it profitable.

Tell me you aren’t a builder, without actually telling me you aren’t a builder. You are literally missing the point of MMH. Right now, you need a lot that is big enough to be sub-divided to create 2 SFH. With the proposal, you can now build a triplex and sell each for around a million and make more money than if you put up a 2.5 million dollar SF house. You are disincentivizing SFH in a SFH neighborhood. One thing you did get right is that you aren’t really helping those that are disadvantaged- you are building density and helping someone who can afford a million dollar home.

Triplexes means you can get a similar price for 2 units, the 3rd unit, the bottom unit, will sell for less. The better bet is two SFH's turned sideways and squeezed onto a lot. That's been done plenty in the DMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That would be a pretty shocking bait and switch. Everything I can find on the subject is touting the MMH's adherence to SFH standards (other than reduced parking and larger max size for 5-8 unit buildings - go from 6,000 to 8,000sf)

Ummm that is how the County Board has always operated.

Yup. They’ll make some tweak to the code in a certain neighborhood to double the height if the building has X amount of committed affordable. They will advertise this change only in the Washington Times and then push it through with limited neighborhood opposition because it’s only a “targeted change.” They will then be able to push through any site plans with the double height CAFs. Been there, done that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a wonder to watch some of the most privileged in our society clothe themselves in rightousness as they pull the ladder up behind them.

I think this is very unfair. Nowhere in the entire United States has the type of reforms proposed in Arlington. Of course people who have worked hard to make their homes here are worried. This is an extreme proposal and it should (but will not) be dialed back to try and thread the needle in a way that balances things out and recognizes the infrastructure issues. We can have change without going nuclear.

I think this is very delusional. Try slumming it one day and drive through South Arlington. Plenty of examples that have been there for decades now. South Glebe Rd - they just slapped up some more oluxury townhouses on a little slip of land located across the street from a couple of apartment buildings, and then across the road there is a small infill build of large luxury SFH houses from about 10 years ago, a couple duplexes next to that, then next to that shoehorned in on some awkward strip another set of townhouses that are about 15 years old. Tons of small SFH homes behind that. Across the street a hand full of infill build townhomes from a decade ago then next to that some habit for humanity townhomes also from a 12+ yrs ago and next to that this small little apartment building that has seriously been there forever but recently got repainted and I think some renovations. Oh wait I forget that one SFH with what appears to be junkyard that grows in the front yard. All that infill building and people happily purchased those homes at very high prices. Those people worked hard to make their homes here. There is absolutely nothing extreme about this proposal because it already happens. They are just making sure it happens more places.

I don't know if people like you are really this dumb but you do realize that only certain lots are going to be useful for a developer. Duplexes and tri plexes might be ok for an individual home builder but actual developer companies want something that will be a community. That's their business. They don't build one off houses. So the actual number of lots that are going to meet that need in North Arlington that they can buy at a cost that will allow them to recoup their investment is pretty limited. They aren't going to bother to buy SFHs to tear down to replace. It's too costly in terms of dollars and time. They might take down a single small house but what they really want is land and no existing building. It's quicker and less costly. Remember they deal in volume. Now the smaller home builders, They might do the duplex but maybe not. It's a different kind of build verses one single family home. There is a start up cost if the builder isn't already in that space that might be too costly and time consuming to consider. Two smaller SFH on the same lot is more likely. What is not likely is that any of those home will be substantially less in cost that any other home in the neighborhood. They will be slightly less but not much less. And "affordable housing" ?? Forget it. Too expensive to deal with unless someone gives them the house and a substantial lot for free. Even with tax credits that can't offset the cost enough to make it profitable.

Tell me you aren’t a builder, without actually telling me you aren’t a builder. You are literally missing the point of MMH. Right now, you need a lot that is big enough to be sub-divided to create 2 SFH. With the proposal, you can now build a triplex and sell each for around a million and make more money than if you put up a 2.5 million dollar SF house. You are disincentivizing SFH in a SFH neighborhood. One thing you did get right is that you aren’t really helping those that are disadvantaged- you are building density and helping someone who can afford a million dollar home.

I was going to say, tell me you aren't a builder without a actually telling me you aren't builder because the poster doesn't understand that most of the building in Arlington is done by small builders and not developers like Toll Brothers. Sometimes NVR will buy a bank building like they did on Langston Blvd and fill it with $1.3M townhouses or tear down a group of the brick apartments in Westover and throw up some townhouses or Evergreen's fiasco at the corner of Washington Blvd. and George Mason Dr. I work for several of those small Arlington builders who buy tear down lots and building one single family house. They are actually banking lots right now waiting to see what happens with the new LDA requirements saying that all water has to be contained on the lot and cannot go into a neighbor's lot. The best lots are those sloping toward the street, preferably near a storm water catch basin. Second best are lots with impervious surfaces -- like the concrete parking pads and work areas you see in older neighborhoods where someone once ran a business from the home. The LDA requirements are looser if there is already a good deal of disturbed land.

If the LDA requirements are too stringent, the builder will build a single family home as planned, but if they are relaxed for Missing Middle, you bet they will build three townhouses on a 6,000 sq.ft lot or a quad plex on a 10,000 sq.ft. lot. They make more money doing the latter. If the neighborhood opposes them, they point to the Arlington County Board. Honestly, Missing Middle housing is the biggest get out of jail free card that Arlington ever gave to builders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plenty of shit areas to buy in still

You mean in Columbia Heights which is full of horrible duplexes from the 1940s and 1950s? That's not the type of duplex MM masterminds want. They want a duplex in the Discovery school district with three bedrooms and two baths upstairs, family room open to big kitchen, breakfast area and screened in porch and basement bedroom, bath, and rec room. Plenty of these duplexes are available in Arlington and are called townhouses. But only a few of them are in the Discovery school district. They need more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know which neighborhoods have restrictive covenants?

Broyhill Forest
Waycroft Woodlawn
Lacey Forest
Larchmont

Probably more.

The question is whether the zoning restrictions will just be loosened (in which case covenants stand) or if they will affirmatively allow the new buildings (in which case the covenants are superseded by law)

That would be a big boon for those neighborhoods. Lots of large lots, especially in Larchmont and Broyhill Forest that could be subdivided into two lots but now can have a small apartment building. Wahoo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs buyers when you can rent to recent grads at $2,500-3,000/month

I think that is a valid point

I don’t understand why a typical developer would decide to build and manage small properties. It makes more sense to sell the units. It’s possible one person would buy all the units and rent them out just as it’s possible for one person to own multiple homes and rent them out now.

Passive income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who needs buyers when you can rent to recent grads at $2,500-3,000/month

I think that is a valid point

Yes, this is what will happen. Multifamily housing will be rentals. There will be more opportunity to rent in Arlington and less opportunity to own a home. This is already a county of renters and it will become even moreso under the Missing Middle changes. Whether that is good or bad is a matter of opinion, but it’s undoubtedly the truth of the matter.

You are correct It is a way to introduce more renters into single family neighborhoods. Investors will buy those 4 plexes and rent them to people who want to be in the school district. As more multifamily are built, the neighborhood will become less desirable, and the single family homes will continue to be torn down for multifamily. Then the neighborhood won't be the neighborhood, the YIMBYs thought they would have. They could have stayed in Columbia Heights and gotten the same type of schools, crimes, and unsavory neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Yep and increase the bar if you don’t want to live in a quadruple lot neighborhood with no parking.

Where are the starter homes? Among other things, investors, which pushes pressure above and below.

I can see why if you’ve never owned, or live in something even worse, this would be a step up. It will also prohibit you from ever owning.

That is unless you’re on the mommy and daddy plan, in which case nothing matters. Do what you want. Believe what you want. Vote whatever you want. Life hasn’t had any consequences so far. So why start now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Plenty of shit areas to buy in still

You mean in Columbia Heights which is full of horrible duplexes from the 1940s and 1950s? That's not the type of duplex MM masterminds want. They want a duplex in the Discovery school district with three bedrooms and two baths upstairs, family room open to big kitchen, breakfast area and screened in porch and basement bedroom, bath, and rec room. Plenty of these duplexes are available in Arlington and are called townhouses. But only a few of them are in the Discovery school district. They need more.

So you don’t want housing, you want what others have for nothing? Anacostia has SFH. You even say you want diversity. Life in the city.

Well? What are you waiting for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Plenty of shit areas to buy in still

You mean in Columbia Heights which is full of horrible duplexes from the 1940s and 1950s? That's not the type of duplex MM masterminds want. They want a duplex in the Discovery school district with three bedrooms and two baths upstairs, family room open to big kitchen, breakfast area and screened in porch and basement bedroom, bath, and rec room. Plenty of these duplexes are available in Arlington and are called townhouses. But only a few of them are in the Discovery school district. They need more.

So you don’t want housing, you want what others have for nothing? Anacostia has SFH. You even say you want diversity. Life in the city.

Well? What are you waiting for?

Ewwwww, Anacostia.

[Anonymous]

The Arlington county board is selling out homeowners... why? No one asked for this. The market isn't asking for it. There are currently 293 townhomes or condos for sale in Arlington County, compared to 150 detached homes. The ACB admits in their own materials 30%+ of the existing housing stock in Arlington is "middle" style. How much should it be? 50%? 80%?

This is the handout of a lifetime to developers, builders and corporate landlords. The assumptions they've used are laughable -- of course there will be more cars and more kids per unit than they admit. And once they pass this (which they will) then they will move to increase the allowable height, increase lot coverage, etc. etc. Two major cities in the country have done something similar to this so far -- Minneapolis and Portland -- and neither have gone as far as the ACB in allowing 6- or 8-plex units.

Institutional investors, like Blackrock, Invitation Homes, Welcome Homes, etc will finally have an in without having to buy a high-rise. They will buy up lots and build 4, 6 and 8-plex for rent. The mid-atlantic and northeast has so far avoided much of this institutional investing outside of large apartment buildings in city centers, but no more after Arlington county has their way. In 2021 30% of homes sold in the state of Texas were sold to institutional buyers. Thats where this could be headed.

My hope is that this falls flat in the market, and homebuyers would rather buy further out with hybrid work than be crammed into a multi-family in Arlington. And that renters would prefer to be in a building with amenities in a walkable neighborhood instead of deep into 22207 where they have to drive everywhere. Time will tell, but the damage will not be able to be undone.