Arlington "missing middle"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would really like to live in Laguna Beach. I can't afford it though. Do you think the residents there would be open to upzoning so people like me can afford to buy there?

No idea. What I do know is that it should be legal to build multifamily homes there.

And you can. Have you ever been to Arlington?

I... live here in Arlington. Have for some time.

Noticed that apartments, condos and townhouses are quite plentiful? Would be pretty hard to do if it was illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

There’s no real shortage of 500k condos in Arlington, but I guess the idea is some people would prefer to live in a non walkable neighborhood?

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/1021-N-Garfield-St-22201/unit-235/home/11281195

This just proves that these things are not going to pencil out for developers. This condo unit is approx. 800 sq ft selling at $500k. Montgomery County did a missing middle study that determined that for a 6-unit apartment structure on a SF lot would generate 800 sq ft max unit size. That means that a developer will need to cover the costs of land, regulatory/fees, labor, materials, marketing, and risk adjusted profit within a total of $3m in anticipated revenue. The only areas where they can cut costs are on land and materials, so they will be targeting the cheapest houses and building them to the lowest quality standards and even then it is not clear that the risks would meet the rewards.

I think duplex and triplexes are going to be the most common form of missing middle. Simplexes will be rare, especially since they kept parking minimums.

Apparently the other cities that allowed for missing middle didn’t legalize sixplexes so I guess a big part of that push was to allow the county board members to be FIRST! The now abandoned eightplex plan also allowed to claim with a semi straight face there would be actual “affordable” units.

I think the net result is that missing middle 2.0 is going to be about ways to aggressively encourage 4+ housing - e.g., limiting single family house square footage, allowing multifamily to higher lot coverage/build taller. I guess we’ll see what happens!

The Montgomery County study concluded that the profitability gets worse the fewer units are generated.

Minneapolis allows up to tri-plexes and they have only generated about 100 housing units in four years city-wide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would really like to live in Laguna Beach. I can't afford it though. Do you think the residents there would be open to upzoning so people like me can afford to buy there?

No idea. What I do know is that it should be legal to build multifamily homes there.

And you can. Have you ever been to Arlington?

I... live here in Arlington. Have for some time.

Noticed that apartments, condos and townhouses are quite plentiful? Would be pretty hard to do if it was illegal.

Not in residential neighborhoods, they aren’t. Almost eighty percent of residential land is single family houses, in areas where it’s illegal to build anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would really like to live in Laguna Beach. I can't afford it though. Do you think the residents there would be open to upzoning so people like me can afford to buy there?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

There’s no real shortage of 500k condos in Arlington, but I guess the idea is some people would prefer to live in a non walkable neighborhood?

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/1021-N-Garfield-St-22201/unit-235/home/11281195

This just proves that these things are not going to pencil out for developers. This condo unit is approx. 800 sq ft selling at $500k. Montgomery County did a missing middle study that determined that for a 6-unit apartment structure on a SF lot would generate 800 sq ft max unit size. That means that a developer will need to cover the costs of land, regulatory/fees, labor, materials, marketing, and risk adjusted profit within a total of $3m in anticipated revenue. The only areas where they can cut costs are on land and materials, so they will be targeting the cheapest houses and building them to the lowest quality standards and even then it is not clear that the risks would meet the rewards.

Good bye to all old, affordable SFHs. Developers will outbid everyone. They will all get ripped down to house for singles and people without kids.

You don’t seem to have a problem with the fact a hundred seventy older houses are being replaced with Mcmansions every year.

A big claim of MMH was that families wanted to live in these leafy SFH neighborhoods and send their kids to the schools there. The duplexes and triplexes are going to be more expensive than the houses that are being torn down. Developers are going to maximize profit by building small apartments and all the families that wanted to buy in Single FAMILY neighborhoods will be priced out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would really like to live in Laguna Beach. I can't afford it though. Do you think the residents there would be open to upzoning so people like me can afford to buy there?

No idea. What I do know is that it should be legal to build multifamily homes there.

And you can. Have you ever been to Arlington?

I... live here in Arlington. Have for some time.

Noticed that apartments, condos and townhouses are quite plentiful? Would be pretty hard to do if it was illegal.

Not in residential neighborhoods, they aren’t. Almost eighty percent of residential land is single family houses, in areas where it’s illegal to build anything else.

Apartments are not in residential neighborhoods? That’s an oxymoron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

There’s no real shortage of 500k condos in Arlington, but I guess the idea is some people would prefer to live in a non walkable neighborhood?

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/1021-N-Garfield-St-22201/unit-235/home/11281195

This just proves that these things are not going to pencil out for developers. This condo unit is approx. 800 sq ft selling at $500k. Montgomery County did a missing middle study that determined that for a 6-unit apartment structure on a SF lot would generate 800 sq ft max unit size. That means that a developer will need to cover the costs of land, regulatory/fees, labor, materials, marketing, and risk adjusted profit within a total of $3m in anticipated revenue. The only areas where they can cut costs are on land and materials, so they will be targeting the cheapest houses and building them to the lowest quality standards and even then it is not clear that the risks would meet the rewards.

Good bye to all old, affordable SFHs. Developers will outbid everyone. They will all get ripped down to house for singles and people without kids.

You don’t seem to have a problem with the fact a hundred seventy older houses are being replaced with Mcmansions every year.

A big claim of MMH was that families wanted to live in these leafy SFH neighborhoods and send their kids to the schools there. The duplexes and triplexes are going to be more expensive than the houses that are being torn down. Developers are going to maximize profit by building small apartments and all the families that wanted to buy in Single FAMILY neighborhoods will be priced out.

This is correct and the only way that it’s profitable in those neighborhoods. As a result, it will have zero impact on affordability but may encourage someone that works in Arlington to choose to accept some limitations to live in Arlington if they can be in boundary for Yorktown that otherwise may have chosen Fairfax or Montgomery County where they could get good schools and better housing choices at the same price but less convenience to work. To be clear, this is a very, very niche market.

The only other use case would be to generate more smaller rental/condo units. However, it is against principles of urbanism to add that residential density outside of transit corridors and there’s a reason for that. Usually that kind of low-amenity MFH is associated with lower income tenants, which doesn’t make sense in the Arlington context.

[Anonymous]

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?

Nobody buys up a bunch of small eggs to rent them out. Not a great eggsample.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

But you don’t understand, developers won’t pay that because they’ll collude to not bid up the price. /s

The MM study in Montgomery County found that individuals were actually willing to bid up SFH prices higher than developers were willing/could pay to make it profitable. So congratulations, this will net you some additional $ while not creating any new housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

That last part doesn’t follow because any new missing middle homes on the property will, also, be based on comps. Even a new 1,600 square foot townhouse ain’t getting $1.4 m.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would really like to live in Laguna Beach. I can't afford it though. Do you think the residents there would be open to upzoning so people like me can afford to buy there?

Did someone mention zoning related to affordable housing in California?

https://www.marinij.com/2023/01/15/marin-cities-risk-builders-remedy-over-housing-plan-delays/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

That last part doesn’t follow because any new missing middle homes on the property will, also, be based on comps. Even a new 1,600 square foot townhouse ain’t getting $1.4 m.

That’s exactly the price of a new build TH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

That last part doesn’t follow because any new missing middle homes on the property will, also, be based on comps. Even a new 1,600 square foot townhouse ain’t getting $1.4 m.

That’s exactly the price of a new build TH.

It’s the price of a four-story 3,000 square foot townhouse. Ot a three-story townhome that’s half to two-thirds the size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the title is supposed to be "Boomers and Real Estate Developers plan to ruin Arlington"

Or

"Missing Middle: in ARL you need 1.5 for an MM unit"

It’s boomers who seem to be most against missing middle.

What costs more: a $500,000 condo in a six plex, or a fancy new $2,000,000 Mcmansion?

I am fascinated that you think this is how it’s going to play out. What do you think that $2m house is going to be worth once it is upzoned? You think current property owners are going to leave money on the table and hand it over to developers to profit?

Somewhere between $2.05m to $2.1m. Because it makes no sense for developers to bid each other up when there are so many other lots they could buy instead.

NP here. I have a nicely renovated (within the past 3 years) 4 BR/ 3 BA home in N Arlington. Based on comps I’m guessing it is worth around $1.2. Of that about 800-900k is land value. If a development can now built 3 THs on my lot, I’m guessing the land value will go up at least somewhat. So I would now expect to sell my home for, let’s say $1.4-1.5 in coming years. The new homes will therefore also be worth more.

That last part doesn’t follow because any new missing middle homes on the property will, also, be based on comps. Even a new 1,600 square foot townhouse ain’t getting $1.4 m.

That’s exactly the price of a new build TH.

It’s the price of a four-story 3,000 square foot townhouse. Ot a three-story townhome that’s half to two-thirds the size.

First off, that’s an exaggeration. Second, there is nothing that stops builders from going smaller. The build what they do because that’s what the market wants.