Arlington Missing Middle Housing Q&A

[Anonymous]

Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

The builders are getting every lot they can get their hands on. MM isn’t changing that. It is changing what’s going to go up on those lots. Instead of a $2mm McMansion, it will be $1mm townhomes or duplexes. Undesirable homes on undesirable building lots are still going to be relatively cheap because the developers won’t want to deal with the hills or the setbacks.

The Boomers cashing out could refuse to sell to developers. Many of them are sitting on $500k+ in profit on a house they didn’t maintain at all for the last 20 years. But they’re cashing out for top dollar and minimal expense. When it comes to real estate every man is out to max his returns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

Then that would be a win bc the most they can build is an 8 plex. If the Plan Langston Blvd people get their way, it will be all mid and high rises stretching down Langston. The best anyone near Langston could hope for is MM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the county should prioritize denser housing along existing commercial corridors. Giving developers carte blanche to build 6 and 8-plex monsters in the middle of SFH neighborhoods just sounds...ill advised.

MM housing in residential neighborhoods would have the same setbacks of a SFH. They wouldn’t be any more of a monster than the standard Arlington McMansion.

The MM people want the ACB/Zoning to relax the setbacks to 15 feet rather than the current 25 feet. The only exceptions would have to be streets where there are neighborhood covenants that have a 35 foot setback.
The tricky parts are going to be lot coverage, storm water management, side setbacks, parking, side lots with traffic lines of sight, and tree coverage.

I had to politely point out to a neighbor who is the Arlington County planner working on MM housing that not all the lots in North Arlington are flat. All of the plans assume that multiple units can be placed on any lot. In hilly neighborhoods, there may be a 12,000 square foot lot (where planners envision 8 units can be built) that will only support one house, because most of the lot is a hillside. This would be very attractive to some people buying a single family home because they would have nice views and privacy. But it would be very expensive and difficult to engineer those 12,000 square foot lots to support 8 units. Thinking of Tara, Country Club Hills, Bellevue Forest, Crystal Spring Knolls, Dover, Riverwood, RiverCrest, Dominion Hills, Madison Manor, and other hilly areas. Her response was "I've never seen lots in Arlington where you could not build multiple housing units."
Mkay.

Anything can be done for a price. You’re not going to dump $500k in engineering and grading on a lot that cost you $1m and would support a $2m home. But you might if you could sell 8 units at $1.2m each. Like anything, the more desirable lots will be redeveloped first, but when those run out and prices go up they’ll go after the low hanging fruit as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the county should prioritize denser housing along existing commercial corridors. Giving developers carte blanche to build 6 and 8-plex monsters in the middle of SFH neighborhoods just sounds...ill advised.

MM housing in residential neighborhoods would have the same setbacks of a SFH. They wouldn’t be any more of a monster than the standard Arlington McMansion.

Except the zoning board seems to make it very easy to get an exemption from the setback rules (I got one and it was NBD). Saying these homes will be subject to the rules doesn;t really mean anything if no one has to follow the rules. [But please don't make me get rid of my screened in porch that violates the side setback rules].

That’s a separate issue. I’m in favor of increasing setbacks for all housing types and limiting impervious surface area (including driveways and patios) in residential neighborhoods, buts that not what’s being considered here.

Yes but it does not really put minds at ease to say that people should not worry about the new MM development since the setback rules will still be in place when it is super easy for developers to get exemptions to those rules. If they want to change zoning to allow more MM housing they should add something saying that the zoning board can't grant zoning variances for MM development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

Then that would be a win bc the most they can build is an 8 plex. If the Plan Langston Blvd people get their way, it will be all mid and high rises stretching down Langston. The best anyone near Langston could hope for is MM.

A number of the YIMBYs pushing MM live off Langston Blvd. One has to wonder what their motives might be -- perhaps maximizing their profits on the sale of their s**tshacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the county should prioritize denser housing along existing commercial corridors. Giving developers carte blanche to build 6 and 8-plex monsters in the middle of SFH neighborhoods just sounds...ill advised.

MM housing in residential neighborhoods would have the same setbacks of a SFH. They wouldn’t be any more of a monster than the standard Arlington McMansion.

The MM people want the ACB/Zoning to relax the setbacks to 15 feet rather than the current 25 feet. The only exceptions would have to be streets where there are neighborhood covenants that have a 35 foot setback.
The tricky parts are going to be lot coverage, storm water management, side setbacks, parking, side lots with traffic lines of sight, and tree coverage.

I had to politely point out to a neighbor who is the Arlington County planner working on MM housing that not all the lots in North Arlington are flat. All of the plans assume that multiple units can be placed on any lot. In hilly neighborhoods, there may be a 12,000 square foot lot (where planners envision 8 units can be built) that will only support one house, because most of the lot is a hillside. This would be very attractive to some people buying a single family home because they would have nice views and privacy. But it would be very expensive and difficult to engineer those 12,000 square foot lots to support 8 units. Thinking of Tara, Country Club Hills, Bellevue Forest, Crystal Spring Knolls, Dover, Riverwood, RiverCrest, Dominion Hills, Madison Manor, and other hilly areas. Her response was "I've never seen lots in Arlington where you could not build multiple housing units."
Mkay.

Anything can be done for a price. You’re not going to dump $500k in engineering and grading on a lot that cost you $1m and would support a $2m home. But you might if you could sell 8 units at $1.2m each. Like anything, the more desirable lots will be redeveloped first, but when those run out and prices go up they’ll go after the low hanging fruit as well.

I am for this. It might get rid of the RPA restrictions and make my lot more valuable. Right now half of it is in an RPA and not buildable. Get rid of the RPA requirements and ca-ching!

[Anonymous]

Sounds like my lot will be worth twice as much when I sell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

Then that would be a win bc the most they can build is an 8 plex. If the Plan Langston Blvd people get their way, it will be all mid and high rises stretching down Langston. The best anyone near Langston could hope for is MM.

A number of the YIMBYs pushing MM live off Langston Blvd. One has to wonder what their motives might be -- perhaps maximizing their profits on the sale of their s**tshacks.

Maybe they want someplace local to downsize, or for their kids to be able to afford homes in the neighborhood? I really can’t imagine how tearing down a SFH along a 4-lane road and replacing it with townhouses or duplexes is going to ruin the “character” of the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the county should prioritize denser housing along existing commercial corridors. Giving developers carte blanche to build 6 and 8-plex monsters in the middle of SFH neighborhoods just sounds...ill advised.

MM housing in residential neighborhoods would have the same setbacks of a SFH. They wouldn’t be any more of a monster than the standard Arlington McMansion.

Except the zoning board seems to make it very easy to get an exemption from the setback rules (I got one and it was NBD). Saying these homes will be subject to the rules doesn;t really mean anything if no one has to follow the rules. [But please don't make me get rid of my screened in porch that violates the side setback rules].

That’s a separate issue. I’m in favor of increasing setbacks for all housing types and limiting impervious surface area (including driveways and patios) in residential neighborhoods, buts that not what’s being considered here.

Yes but it does not really put minds at ease to say that people should not worry about the new MM development since the setback rules will still be in place when it is super easy for developers to get exemptions to those rules. If they want to change zoning to allow more MM housing they should add something saying that the zoning board can't grant zoning variances for MM development.

Why is a variance for a single family home more acceptable than one for a duplex? Either every housing type can seek one or no one should be able to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the county should prioritize denser housing along existing commercial corridors. Giving developers carte blanche to build 6 and 8-plex monsters in the middle of SFH neighborhoods just sounds...ill advised.

MM housing in residential neighborhoods would have the same setbacks of a SFH. They wouldn’t be any more of a monster than the standard Arlington McMansion.

The MM people want the ACB/Zoning to relax the setbacks to 15 feet rather than the current 25 feet. The only exceptions would have to be streets where there are neighborhood covenants that have a 35 foot setback.
The tricky parts are going to be lot coverage, storm water management, side setbacks, parking, side lots with traffic lines of sight, and tree coverage.

I had to politely point out to a neighbor who is the Arlington County planner working on MM housing that not all the lots in North Arlington are flat. All of the plans assume that multiple units can be placed on any lot. In hilly neighborhoods, there may be a 12,000 square foot lot (where planners envision 8 units can be built) that will only support one house, because most of the lot is a hillside. This would be very attractive to some people buying a single family home because they would have nice views and privacy. But it would be very expensive and difficult to engineer those 12,000 square foot lots to support 8 units. Thinking of Tara, Country Club Hills, Bellevue Forest, Crystal Spring Knolls, Dover, Riverwood, RiverCrest, Dominion Hills, Madison Manor, and other hilly areas. Her response was "I've never seen lots in Arlington where you could not build multiple housing units."
Mkay.

The current proposal maintains the same setbacks and heights. The “MM people” might want something else, but it’s not in the proposal.

Also the planner is correct. If you can put a house on a lot, you can put a duplex there too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for it.

And you don’t live in an area where they want to implement this. 2-3 households on a 5k square foot lot is not feasible. There are parking problems already without this zoning, and the schools are overcrowded, as it is. Another idiotic idea from the board. Please vote these clowns and crooks out.

I’m voting for it! Teachers, nurses, and police officers should be able to live where they work. It will help a very small amount of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

Then that would be a win bc the most they can build is an 8 plex. If the Plan Langston Blvd people get their way, it will be all mid and high rises stretching down Langston. The best anyone near Langston could hope for is MM.

A number of the YIMBYs pushing MM live off Langston Blvd. One has to wonder what their motives might be -- perhaps maximizing their profits on the sale of their s**tshacks.

Maybe they want someplace local to downsize, or for their kids to be able to afford homes in the neighborhood? I really can’t imagine how tearing down a SFH along a 4-lane road and replacing it with townhouses or duplexes is going to ruin the “character” of the neighborhood.

A good portion of the single family areas in Arlington will be upzoned, not just the areas along Langston Blvd. So if you live in Dominion Hills on a 6,000 square foot lot, the lot could be upzoned to allow two duplexes with 4 housing units. If everyone does it, Dominion Hills will go from a starter home neighborhood to a community of duplexes. That changes the character from a single family neighborhood with front lawns and back yards to one with 4 housing units and 4 parking pads with patches of grass in the front and back.

Of course, Arlington County will probably fail to take into account that they have major sewer lines running through the back yards of many parts of Dominion Hills. Nothing can be built above those sewer lines. So they can only built one duplex at the front.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

The builders are getting every lot they can get their hands on. MM isn’t changing that. It is changing what’s going to go up on those lots. Instead of a $2mm McMansion, it will be $1mm townhomes or duplexes. Undesirable homes on undesirable building lots are still going to be relatively cheap because the developers won’t want to deal with the hills or the setbacks.

The Boomers cashing out could refuse to sell to developers. Many of them are sitting on $500k+ in profit on a house they didn’t maintain at all for the last 20 years. But they’re cashing out for top dollar and minimal expense. When it comes to real estate every man is out to max his returns.

Okay, Eeyore. Leave the boomers out of this. You will be one soon enough. Maybe you should move to Fairfax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle will be a boon to builders who are already banking single family lots along Langston Blvd awaiting upzoning. They are renting the houses until they can be torn down for MM.

Meanwhile, people who could have bought those houses and lived in them are dealing with a shrinking inventory of somewhat affordable housing in Arlington.

Big winners will be builders who can now put 8 houses instead of one on a lot and the people selling their houses to builders.

Then that would be a win bc the most they can build is an 8 plex. If the Plan Langston Blvd people get their way, it will be all mid and high rises stretching down Langston. The best anyone near Langston could hope for is MM.

It will be an improvement for Langston.