Wisconsin Ave Development Project

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:If you build 100-200 townhouses in and near upper Wisc, they all would not be $1M plus. EYA tends to be at the higher end. If they can do it at Westbard, it can be done at upper Wisc Avenue.

Pretty sure they would be $1m plus. You want them because they’re attractive to you, and many people will feel the same, so they will have a high value.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you build 100-200 townhouses in and near upper Wisc, they all would not be $1M plus. EYA tends to be at the higher end. If they can do it at Westbard, it can be done at upper Wisc Avenue.

Pretty sure they would be $1m plus. You want them because they’re attractive to you, and many people will feel the same, so they will have a high value.


The $1MM townhouse won’t have a deck or a fireplace and the cheapest finishings. That is how new home sales work…everything is an extra cost.
Anonymous
So what? Not everything needs to be so fancy. A lot of people would love a home they could improve later. And condos don’t usually have outdoor space or fireplaces either.
Anonymous
I don’t know how you imagine these $1m townhouses, but there isn’t a townhome in Upper NW for under $1.7m let alone a brand new one. Condos are well over $1m so that’s crazy. I like the idea of townhomes and even at those prices north of $1.5m they would be a bargain and very popular but you’ll get the City Ridge up and down the avenue
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:If you build 100-200 townhouses in and near upper Wisc, they all would not be $1M plus. EYA tends to be at the higher end. If they can do it at Westbard, it can be done at upper Wisc Avenue.


Westbard is not on top of a metro station. Sure, it is proximate, but the value of the land on upper Wisconsin Avenue is completely different than a former strip mall that is in a transportation desert.
Anonymous
It’s true. Our planners have lost the ability to plan communities with diverse living options. All these new condos look alike and the Wisconsin Ave plan is virtually identical to the Connecticut Avenue plan. No thought. No creativity. No imagination.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you build 100-200 townhouses in and near upper Wisc, they all would not be $1M plus. EYA tends to be at the higher end. If they can do it at Westbard, it can be done at upper Wisc Avenue.


Why do people keep talking about imaginary townhomes that aren’t in any of the plans?


The ones at Westbard aren’t imaginary


That’s not FH…go live at Westbard…did you even look at the topic of this thread?


lol I started the thread.

PP mentioned there are no townhomes in Bethesda/NWDC in the $1M price range and clearly there will be plenty options. This could be a good range for FH townhomes.

FH is 5 min away. It’s more or less the same area give me a break.


"More or less" is doing A LOT of work there.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:So what? Not everything needs to be so fancy. A lot of people would love a home they could improve later. And condos don’t usually have outdoor space or fireplaces either.


Also, starting at $1MM means that only like 10% will be sold with just the base finishings, and others will have higher end standard finishings as a default at a higher price.

The reason somebody wants a townhome is for outdoor space and a deck…are you suggesting they should build condos (which often have balconies and some outdoor space).
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It’s true. Our planners have lost the ability to plan communities with diverse living options. All these new condos look alike and the Wisconsin Ave plan is virtually identical to the Connecticut Avenue plan. No thought. No creativity. No imagination.


If you stripped away single family zoning, there could be all sort of imagination around different size and shape buildings that could house one, two or many families. But when the zoning s either single family OR medium to high density, then you get single family home or multifamily buildings. If you want the "gentle density" that you seem to be pushing for, then that is a different discussion. But you aren't going to get low density on a high impact transportation corridor.
Anonymous
You could easily have mixed density — some tall condo buildings and some townhomes at FH. It’s a big site, and the townhomes would help the transition from the corridor to the neighborhood. I do not favor getting rid of SFH zoning.
Anonymous
I’m all for townhouses along the avenue. But they will start at $2m
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:You could easily have mixed density — some tall condo buildings and some townhomes at FH. It’s a big site, and the townhomes would help the transition from the corridor to the neighborhood. I do not favor getting rid of SFH zoning.


Given the underlying value of the land, the townhouses would need to start at 2 million or more. There is zero chance that it is economically feasible to developed "affordable" townhouses in the areas that are being redeveloped. It is really a pointless discussion. Now, if you wanted to do away with single family zoning, then many of the existing houses could be razed for duplexes or rows of townhouses, if parcels were combined and redivided, but that isn't what you are looking for, now, is it?
Anonymous
I suppose I question the value of the land because I do not see the demand for all these new apartments and condos. Look at city ridge! Nice development, but not nearly leaded on the residential or commercial side.
Anonymous
They razed some houses at garrison and Wisconsin and rebuilt them into painfully small units, some with only 1-2 windows, some below ground. I looked at a 2 bed/2bath — 700 square feet for $750k. I don’t know if they ever sold, but nothing was gained by razing those houses.
Anonymous
You all realize that HOA townhomes in SW are now well over $1M.

Brand new townhouses in Wisconsin will START at about $2m. This will never happen because they want more units to sell and rent
post reply Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Message Quick Reply
Go to: