MM Is Dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

Then why is Dupont Circle so expensive if it’s unattractive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

My high density neighborhood is very attractive. The notion that duplexes, four plexes and small multifamily ruin neighborhoods is just demented. take a walk sometime outside of your own neighborhood. (especially since walking in your charmless no-sidewalks neighborhood isn’t much fun.)

The point isn’t that low density is more attractive, meaning looks nicer. It’s that Arlington, and a few other close-in suburbs, have both proximity to jobs and amenities AND the type of housing that is most-prized by families, which is SFH detached. Arlington also has higher density, including townhouses, 2-3 bedroom condos, and rental apartments, but that’s not what a young family wants. And if they can’t get what they want in Arlington, they move out to the exurbs. You’re not going to build your way into making them want to live in multifamily housing. If they wanted that, there are options that exist and at a lower PP than MM will deliver. What they want, a SFH, does not exist at the price point they want, and MM won’t change that.

This idiot must have never heard of a place named “West Virginia”…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

My high density neighborhood is very attractive. The notion that duplexes, four plexes and small multifamily ruin neighborhoods is just demented. take a walk sometime outside of your own neighborhood. (especially since walking in your charmless no-sidewalks neighborhood isn’t much fun.)

The point isn’t that low density is more attractive, meaning looks nicer. It’s that Arlington, and a few other close-in suburbs, have both proximity to jobs and amenities AND the type of housing that is most-prized by families, which is SFH detached. Arlington also has higher density, including townhouses, 2-3 bedroom condos, and rental apartments, but that’s not what a young family wants. And if they can’t get what they want in Arlington, they move out to the exurbs. You’re not going to build your way into making them want to live in multifamily housing. If they wanted that, there are options that exist and at a lower PP than MM will deliver. What they want, a SFH, does not exist at the price point they want, and MM won’t change that.

This idiot must have never heard of a place named “West Virginia”…

Loudoun county has lots of low density areas that are very desirable and expensive. Density can ruin places depending on the circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

Then why is Dupont Circle so expensive if it’s unattractive?

Both are attractive to different sets of people. I don’t know what your point is, unless you plan to turn Montgomery County suburbs into a 150 year old historic urban area with metro access and in close proximity to museums and several universities, mostly appealing to young childless people. Is this your plan, is this why you’ve made this comparison? Or are you somehow implying that density is expensive on its own? If that’s the case and density is so desirable and expensive, then SFH out in the suburbs must be pretty cheap. Why would you want to drive up prices in the suburbs? Right, isn’t that the issue?

UNLESS…and stay with me here, each place has value to different people. Many of the people that now enjoy SFH used to be the people that lives in places like DC, and places like DuPont, in particular. You don’t get to just come in and reevaluate a neighborhood or a series of neighborhoods and decide that, you know, I don’t like.

Have you considered just moving to a place that you like, you selfish twit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Devils advocate, why does someone who can’t afford it think they should “deserve” to live in a particular neighborhood?

They were raised as upper middle class kids by boomer parents who worked hard to accomplish a good life for them. Many were in the first generation to earn college degrees and ground through college on the GI bill or through night school, including law school. They wanted their kids to have what they missed and encouraged them to follow their passions. The kids did so but the passion does not pay enough to have the kind of life they had as a kid.

This is so true. Yimbys are a bunch of people with useless degrees and too much student loan debt that made bad life decisions.

there’s nothing more pathetic than an old boomer refusing to change and holding on to his broke down ratty SFH with no sidewalk as if it were Versailles.

DP. This comment shows the entitlement and disdain YIMBYs have for working and middle class SFH homeowners, suggesting that our modest homes are unworthy of existing and are just “tear downs”. For so many of us, this home is our dwelling and an investment in our now and our future. It took us years - for some, decades - to save for these homes. And yet YIMBYs not only mock our homes but demand they have instant access to homes without any of the hard work it takes to save for one.

So much for the YIMBY concern for the middle classes …. The same homeowners the PP mocks above.

YIMBYs and Density Bros are openly ageist, mocking people as the “Olds”, and dismissing their mobility challenges which require driving. I’ve seen long time residents dismissed with “why don’t you move to Leisure World”?

To be fair, many of the "Olds" have mobility challenges because they live in SFHs and drive everywhere. Maybe if they had actually used their legs at any point in the last 50 years, they wouldn't have mobility challenges. And maybe, just maybe, we should stop consigning future generations do early disability by automobile?

You’re an assh***. I hope everyone reads you to filth. Many elderly have mobility challenges for many reasons, as do young DISABLED people, not for reasons having anything to do with how they behaved or lived at any point in their lives. Seriously, you are the worst and your parents must be so ashamed. No wonder they wouldn’t let you move in or help you with a down payment.

You people act like there are no old people anywhere else in the world. Old people exist in places with townhouses and apartments all over the world. They somehow manage to get around without a 5,000 pound SUV parked six feet from their door. What makes Arlington Olds, who I am told are the healthiest, so particularly special that they won't be able to handle walking a little bit?

Why are retirement communities almost entirely built with "Missing Middle" housing? Its actually easier for Olds to get around by foot and golf cart than having them drive into their local grocery store with a giant truck.

None of that is what I was responding to, rather to the attack from someone who blamed being infirm solely on the housing or vehicle choices someone made at some point in their lives.


For what it’s worth, my dream is to retire to a Pre-War in Manhattan. My parents, however, want to leave their home feet first. I’m not sure why you’re intent on making an enemy of people who supports a lot of what you’re talking about without agreeing that all SFH zoning needs to be eliminated. But, take the L I guess.

Let's keep in mind it was the Nimbys that dragged the Olds off their mobility scooters to use as human shields. Let's also keep in mind we just went through a couple years where we sacrificed young people for the sake of the Olds, with disastrous consequences for the nation.

So I'll just ask what do you want young families to do? Live an hour+ from work and never see each other? Live in cramped and run down apartments? What is the logic in having empty nesters in the best housing in the county?

Those empty nesters lived in cramped and Ron down apartments until they saved enough money to buy a cramped and run down house that they improved over the years. Do the same and stop whining

They bought those places at 25 on a single income. Now people might be able to buy them at 40 on two incomes. You don't see that as a problem?

My parents bought their Arlington Forest house when they were in their Arlington Forest house about 30 years ago when I was 9 and they were in their 40s and both were government employees. It was 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, living room, dining room, kitchen unfinished basement and a side porch. They have pictures of them scarping off wall paper, painting, refinishing the floors, doing extensive yard cleanup. Most of their neighbors were the same. They did a main bedroom and bath addition when my grandparents move in with us and finished the basement with another bathroom around the same time so we three kids would have a place to play. I don't see it as a problem. The problem is that the people who want missing middle housing don't want the type of house my parents bought and that my DH and I bought about five years ago. They want a $1.5 M house for $800K and are not willing to do any work. Our neighborhood has many new homes and the people who live there are pretty open in telling us that their friends want to buy our house and tear it down for a new build. We have our old Arlington friends, most of whom did the same things as we did, and we ignore the new neighbors.

I’m not sure why this is so hard for people to accept: we have a massive housing shortage in this country and the “modest” homes that were affordable 30 yrs ago are no longer affordable. a dual fed family cannot buy a sf home most places in Arlington anymore (much less even a townhome). maybe your view is just that people have the right to preserve zoning in amber and that new housing shouldn’t be built. but stop pretending that people are somehow chosing not to buy affordable housing. it doesn’t exist.

Absolute horse sh*t.

Two GS 12s are bringing in 300K easy all day long and have a frigging pesnion and Cadillac health coverage. They can buy a million dollar house easy af.

Ho hum another delusional NIMBY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

My high density neighborhood is very attractive. The notion that duplexes, four plexes and small multifamily ruin neighborhoods is just demented. take a walk sometime outside of your own neighborhood. (especially since walking in your charmless no-sidewalks neighborhood isn’t much fun.)

The point isn’t that low density is more attractive, meaning looks nicer. It’s that Arlington, and a few other close-in suburbs, have both proximity to jobs and amenities AND the type of housing that is most-prized by families, which is SFH detached. Arlington also has higher density, including townhouses, 2-3 bedroom condos, and rental apartments, but that’s not what a young family wants. And if they can’t get what they want in Arlington, they move out to the exurbs. You’re not going to build your way into making them want to live in multifamily housing. If they wanted that, there are options that exist and at a lower PP than MM will deliver. What they want, a SFH, does not exist at the price point they want, and MM won’t change that.

Plenty of families live in rowhouses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

My high density neighborhood is very attractive. The notion that duplexes, four plexes and small multifamily ruin neighborhoods is just demented. take a walk sometime outside of your own neighborhood. (especially since walking in your charmless no-sidewalks neighborhood isn’t much fun.)

The point isn’t that low density is more attractive, meaning looks nicer. It’s that Arlington, and a few other close-in suburbs, have both proximity to jobs and amenities AND the type of housing that is most-prized by families, which is SFH detached. Arlington also has higher density, including townhouses, 2-3 bedroom condos, and rental apartments, but that’s not what a young family wants. And if they can’t get what they want in Arlington, they move out to the exurbs. You’re not going to build your way into making them want to live in multifamily housing. If they wanted that, there are options that exist and at a lower PP than MM will deliver. What they want, a SFH, does not exist at the price point they want, and MM won’t change that.

Plenty of families live in rowhouses

We have townhomes in Arlington. And yes, families occupy them. But they aren't more affordable than SFHs, especially not when they’re new builds and as large or larger than the older SFH stock. And there are many places where this is already allowed, by right, and more where this could make sense. But MM on a 6000 sqft lot in the middle of a random street isn’t bringing townhomes, it’s brining a one bedroom 6 plex. So, not housing for families. And not particularly affordable either. None of eliminating SFH zoning across the board will address any of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

My high density neighborhood is very attractive. The notion that duplexes, four plexes and small multifamily ruin neighborhoods is just demented. take a walk sometime outside of your own neighborhood. (especially since walking in your charmless no-sidewalks neighborhood isn’t much fun.)

The point isn’t that low density is more attractive, meaning looks nicer. It’s that Arlington, and a few other close-in suburbs, have both proximity to jobs and amenities AND the type of housing that is most-prized by families, which is SFH detached. Arlington also has higher density, including townhouses, 2-3 bedroom condos, and rental apartments, but that’s not what a young family wants. And if they can’t get what they want in Arlington, they move out to the exurbs. You’re not going to build your way into making them want to live in multifamily housing. If they wanted that, there are options that exist and at a lower PP than MM will deliver. What they want, a SFH, does not exist at the price point they want, and MM won’t change that.

Plenty of families live in rowhouses

We have townhomes in Arlington. And yes, families occupy them. But they aren't more affordable than SFHs, especially not when they’re new builds and as large or larger than the older SFH stock. And there are many places where this is already allowed, by right, and more where this could make sense. But MM on a 6000 sqft lot in the middle of a random street isn’t bringing townhomes, it’s brining a one bedroom 6 plex. So, not housing for families. And not particularly affordable either. None of eliminating SFH zoning across the board will address any of this.

It’s not about housing at all, not affordable or attainable housing, anyway. That’s just cover for socially engineering a certain kind of “walkable 15 minute community.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Devils advocate, why does someone who can’t afford it think they should “deserve” to live in a particular neighborhood?

They were raised as upper middle class kids by boomer parents who worked hard to accomplish a good life for them. Many were in the first generation to earn college degrees and ground through college on the GI bill or through night school, including law school. They wanted their kids to have what they missed and encouraged them to follow their passions. The kids did so but the passion does not pay enough to have the kind of life they had as a kid.

This is so true. Yimbys are a bunch of people with useless degrees and too much student loan debt that made bad life decisions.

there’s nothing more pathetic than an old boomer refusing to change and holding on to his broke down ratty SFH with no sidewalk as if it were Versailles.

DP. This comment shows the entitlement and disdain YIMBYs have for working and middle class SFH homeowners, suggesting that our modest homes are unworthy of existing and are just “tear downs”. For so many of us, this home is our dwelling and an investment in our now and our future. It took us years - for some, decades - to save for these homes. And yet YIMBYs not only mock our homes but demand they have instant access to homes without any of the hard work it takes to save for one.

So much for the YIMBY concern for the middle classes …. The same homeowners the PP mocks above.

YIMBYs and Density Bros are openly ageist, mocking people as the “Olds”, and dismissing their mobility challenges which require driving. I’ve seen long time residents dismissed with “why don’t you move to Leisure World”?

To be fair, many of the "Olds" have mobility challenges because they live in SFHs and drive everywhere. Maybe if they had actually used their legs at any point in the last 50 years, they wouldn't have mobility challenges. And maybe, just maybe, we should stop consigning future generations do early disability by automobile?

You’re an assh***. I hope everyone reads you to filth. Many elderly have mobility challenges for many reasons, as do young DISABLED people, not for reasons having anything to do with how they behaved or lived at any point in their lives. Seriously, you are the worst and your parents must be so ashamed. No wonder they wouldn’t let you move in or help you with a down payment.

You people act like there are no old people anywhere else in the world. Old people exist in places with townhouses and apartments all over the world. They somehow manage to get around without a 5,000 pound SUV parked six feet from their door. What makes Arlington Olds, who I am told are the healthiest, so particularly special that they won't be able to handle walking a little bit?

Why are retirement communities almost entirely built with "Missing Middle" housing? Its actually easier for Olds to get around by foot and golf cart than having them drive into their local grocery store with a giant truck.

None of that is what I was responding to, rather to the attack from someone who blamed being infirm solely on the housing or vehicle choices someone made at some point in their lives.


For what it’s worth, my dream is to retire to a Pre-War in Manhattan. My parents, however, want to leave their home feet first. I’m not sure why you’re intent on making an enemy of people who supports a lot of what you’re talking about without agreeing that all SFH zoning needs to be eliminated. But, take the L I guess.

Let's keep in mind it was the Nimbys that dragged the Olds off their mobility scooters to use as human shields. Let's also keep in mind we just went through a couple years where we sacrificed young people for the sake of the Olds, with disastrous consequences for the nation.

So I'll just ask what do you want young families to do? Live an hour+ from work and never see each other? Live in cramped and run down apartments? What is the logic in having empty nesters in the best housing in the county?

Those empty nesters lived in cramped and Ron down apartments until they saved enough money to buy a cramped and run down house that they improved over the years. Do the same and stop whining

They bought those places at 25 on a single income. Now people might be able to buy them at 40 on two incomes. You don't see that as a problem?

My parents bought their Arlington Forest house when they were in their Arlington Forest house about 30 years ago when I was 9 and they were in their 40s and both were government employees. It was 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, living room, dining room, kitchen unfinished basement and a side porch. They have pictures of them scarping off wall paper, painting, refinishing the floors, doing extensive yard cleanup. Most of their neighbors were the same. They did a main bedroom and bath addition when my grandparents move in with us and finished the basement with another bathroom around the same time so we three kids would have a place to play. I don't see it as a problem. The problem is that the people who want missing middle housing don't want the type of house my parents bought and that my DH and I bought about five years ago. They want a $1.5 M house for $800K and are not willing to do any work. Our neighborhood has many new homes and the people who live there are pretty open in telling us that their friends want to buy our house and tear it down for a new build. We have our old Arlington friends, most of whom did the same things as we did, and we ignore the new neighbors.

I’m not sure why this is so hard for people to accept: we have a massive housing shortage in this country and the “modest” homes that were affordable 30 yrs ago are no longer affordable. a dual fed family cannot buy a sf home most places in Arlington anymore (much less even a townhome). maybe your view is just that people have the right to preserve zoning in amber and that new housing shouldn’t be built. but stop pretending that people are somehow chosing not to buy affordable housing. it doesn’t exist.

Absolute horse sh*t.

Two GS 12s are bringing in 300K easy all day long and have a frigging pesnion and Cadillac health coverage. They can buy a million dollar house easy af.

Ho hum another delusional NIMBY

Guess I'm a delusional guy here. Wife and I are a 12 and a 13 and our HHI is 315k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nimbys are the worst. Seriously. You’re ruining this country.

How is this ruining the country? Because people need to live in areas that comport with their affordability instead of the government trying to get everyone a prize at the expense of current homeowners? No one has a right to live in Arlington. It’s a very nice and expensive place.

I would love a house in Newport Beach. I can’t afford a $8M house so I don’t live there.

because EVERYTHING that is a common good gets opposed by NIMBYs. Preschools, high schools, sidewalks, solar powed, waste treatment plants …

The best thing for the common hood would be for people to understand that if you want something nice in this country you have to sacrifice and work your tail off. In an era of student loan forgiveness, free housing for illegal immigrants, and countless other government giveaways it’s gotten totally out of control.

This is why there is a huge disconnect with some liberals in Arlington, extremely socially liberal, but also believe what you said above that you should work hard to get to where you are and should enjoy the benefits of that hard work. They’re happy to donate their hard earned money to those less fortunate, but don’t want them living next-door.

It’s not surprising that a generation of young people who grew up getting participation trophies would have no shame in thinking they deserve to live in close-in high income neighborhoods. The lack of self awareness is galling.

Devils advocate, why does someone who can’t afford it think they should “deserve” to live in a particular neighborhood?

They were raised as upper middle class kids by boomer parents who worked hard to accomplish a good life for them. Many were in the first generation to earn college degrees and ground through college on the GI bill or through night school, including law school. They wanted their kids to have what they missed and encouraged them to follow their passions. The kids did so but the passion does not pay enough to have the kind of life they had as a kid.

This is so true. Yimbys are a bunch of people with useless degrees and too much student loan debt that made bad life decisions.

there’s nothing more pathetic than an old boomer refusing to change and holding on to his broke down ratty SFH with no sidewalk as if it were Versailles.

DP. This comment shows the entitlement and disdain YIMBYs have for working and middle class SFH homeowners, suggesting that our modest homes are unworthy of existing and are just “tear downs”. For so many of us, this home is our dwelling and an investment in our now and our future. It took us years - for some, decades - to save for these homes. And yet YIMBYs not only mock our homes but demand they have instant access to homes without any of the hard work it takes to save for one.

So much for the YIMBY concern for the middle classes …. The same homeowners the PP mocks above.

YIMBYs and Density Bros are openly ageist, mocking people as the “Olds”, and dismissing their mobility challenges which require driving. I’ve seen long time residents dismissed with “why don’t you move to Leisure World”?

To be fair, many of the "Olds" have mobility challenges because they live in SFHs and drive everywhere. Maybe if they had actually used their legs at any point in the last 50 years, they wouldn't have mobility challenges. And maybe, just maybe, we should stop consigning future generations do early disability by automobile?

You’re an assh***. I hope everyone reads you to filth. Many elderly have mobility challenges for many reasons, as do young DISABLED people, not for reasons having anything to do with how they behaved or lived at any point in their lives. Seriously, you are the worst and your parents must be so ashamed. No wonder they wouldn’t let you move in or help you with a down payment.

You people act like there are no old people anywhere else in the world. Old people exist in places with townhouses and apartments all over the world. They somehow manage to get around without a 5,000 pound SUV parked six feet from their door. What makes Arlington Olds, who I am told are the healthiest, so particularly special that they won't be able to handle walking a little bit?

Why are retirement communities almost entirely built with "Missing Middle" housing? Its actually easier for Olds to get around by foot and golf cart than having them drive into their local grocery store with a giant truck.

None of that is what I was responding to, rather to the attack from someone who blamed being infirm solely on the housing or vehicle choices someone made at some point in their lives.


For what it’s worth, my dream is to retire to a Pre-War in Manhattan. My parents, however, want to leave their home feet first. I’m not sure why you’re intent on making an enemy of people who supports a lot of what you’re talking about without agreeing that all SFH zoning needs to be eliminated. But, take the L I guess.

Let's keep in mind it was the Nimbys that dragged the Olds off their mobility scooters to use as human shields. Let's also keep in mind we just went through a couple years where we sacrificed young people for the sake of the Olds, with disastrous consequences for the nation.

So I'll just ask what do you want young families to do? Live an hour+ from work and never see each other? Live in cramped and run down apartments? What is the logic in having empty nesters in the best housing in the county?

Those empty nesters lived in cramped and Ron down apartments until they saved enough money to buy a cramped and run down house that they improved over the years. Do the same and stop whining

They bought those places at 25 on a single income. Now people might be able to buy them at 40 on two incomes. You don't see that as a problem?

My parents bought their Arlington Forest house when they were in their Arlington Forest house about 30 years ago when I was 9 and they were in their 40s and both were government employees. It was 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, living room, dining room, kitchen unfinished basement and a side porch. They have pictures of them scarping off wall paper, painting, refinishing the floors, doing extensive yard cleanup. Most of their neighbors were the same. They did a main bedroom and bath addition when my grandparents move in with us and finished the basement with another bathroom around the same time so we three kids would have a place to play. I don't see it as a problem. The problem is that the people who want missing middle housing don't want the type of house my parents bought and that my DH and I bought about five years ago. They want a $1.5 M house for $800K and are not willing to do any work. Our neighborhood has many new homes and the people who live there are pretty open in telling us that their friends want to buy our house and tear it down for a new build. We have our old Arlington friends, most of whom did the same things as we did, and we ignore the new neighbors.

I’m not sure why this is so hard for people to accept: we have a massive housing shortage in this country and the “modest” homes that were affordable 30 yrs ago are no longer affordable. a dual fed family cannot buy a sf home most places in Arlington anymore (much less even a townhome). maybe your view is just that people have the right to preserve zoning in amber and that new housing shouldn’t be built. but stop pretending that people are somehow chosing not to buy affordable housing. it doesn’t exist.

Absolute horse sh*t.

Two GS 12s are bringing in 300K easy all day long and have a frigging pesnion and Cadillac health coverage. They can buy a million dollar house easy af.

Ho hum another delusional NIMBY

Guess I'm a delusional guy here. Wife and I are a 12 and a 13 and our HHI is 315k.

I am a real estate agent and work mostly in Arlington. I sell many houses to many younger people who have smaller incomes but are smart about what they buy. One couple whose incomes was $170K bought a $970K fixer upper and used a VA loan to qualify for more. The first thing they did was install a new bathroom on the lower level which has two legitimate bedrooms and a separate entrance. They rent that area to visiting nurses and use all of that money to aggressively pay down their mortgage in addition to their regular payment. Another couple with slightly lower income bought a house and AirBnB part of it. They took money from their Thrift Savings Plans to make a larger down payment so that they could qualify for the mortgage. They re repaying their TSPs and will then start paying down their mortgage. Things can be done but many buyers won't buy put in the sweat equity or creativity to make them work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

Then why is Dupont Circle so expensive if it’s unattractive?

Both are attractive to different sets of people. I don’t know what your point is, unless you plan to turn Montgomery County suburbs into a 150 year old historic urban area with metro access and in close proximity to museums and several universities, mostly appealing to young childless people. Is this your plan, is this why you’ve made this comparison? Or are you somehow implying that density is expensive on its own? If that’s the case and density is so desirable and expensive, then SFH out in the suburbs must be pretty cheap. Why would you want to drive up prices in the suburbs? Right, isn’t that the issue?

UNLESS…and stay with me here, each place has value to different people. Many of the people that now enjoy SFH used to be the people that lives in places like DC, and places like DuPont, in particular. You don’t get to just come in and reevaluate a neighborhood or a series of neighborhoods and decide that, you know, I don’t like.

Have you considered just moving to a place that you like, you selfish twit?

Not PP, but nobody is suggesting you should be forced to leave your SFH.

To the contrary, it is the pro-SFH zoning folks who are seeking to force their will on others. They are the ones who want the government to impose strict rules on what private citizens can do with their own land.

If the person next to your house decides to build a four-unit apartment on their property, that doesn’t affect your right to do what you want with your own land. They are not seeking to impose their will on you, nor should you seek to impose yours on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes these low density neighborhoods so attractive? The low density. If we build everything up, they will be less attractive. My neighborhood has a nice mix of apartments, townhomes, and detached homes, but that balance is important. If you get rid of sf zoning, it will tip.

Then why is Dupont Circle so expensive if it’s unattractive?

Both are attractive to different sets of people. I don’t know what your point is, unless you plan to turn Montgomery County suburbs into a 150 year old historic urban area with metro access and in close proximity to museums and several universities, mostly appealing to young childless people. Is this your plan, is this why you’ve made this comparison? Or are you somehow implying that density is expensive on its own? If that’s the case and density is so desirable and expensive, then SFH out in the suburbs must be pretty cheap. Why would you want to drive up prices in the suburbs? Right, isn’t that the issue?

UNLESS…and stay with me here, each place has value to different people. Many of the people that now enjoy SFH used to be the people that lives in places like DC, and places like DuPont, in particular. You don’t get to just come in and reevaluate a neighborhood or a series of neighborhoods and decide that, you know, I don’t like.

Have you considered just moving to a place that you like, you selfish twit?

Not PP, but nobody is suggesting you should be forced to leave your SFH.

To the contrary, it is the pro-SFH zoning folks who are seeking to force their will on others. They are the ones who want the government to impose strict rules on what private citizens can do with their own land.

If the person next to your house decides to build a four-unit apartment on their property, that doesn’t affect your right to do what you want with your own land. They are not seeking to impose their will on you, nor should you seek to impose yours on them.

This disingenuous "nobody is making you sell your home/nobody is forcing you to build a multiplex to replace your sfh/nobody is making you leave" is rife in these discussions, completely missing the concerns presented. It's even in the opening remarks of every one of MoCo AHS listening sessions, where they try to set a rhetorical tone that those in opposition must have it all wrong.

The rest of this post employs the same kind of disingenuity.

[Anonymous]

What’s disingenuous?

It is true that the pro-SFH folks are the ones who want the government to impose strict controls on what private citizens can do with their own land. They are the ones who want to force their will on their neighbors.

[Anonymous]

*The pro-SFH zoning folks, that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s disingenuous?

It is true that the pro-SFH folks are the ones who want the government to impose strict controls on what private citizens can do with their own land. They are the ones who want to force their will on their neighbors.

I understand the pro-density crowd's wish to frame it as though there were no ex ante condition that influenced current residents in their past choices about where they might live and invest time with a neighborhood/community. But that is not the case.