Missing Middle middle finger -- seller insists on SFH restriction

[Anonymous]

I cannot believe that little dump is 1.2…i dont care what you can walk to

[Anonymous]

The owner is free to do as he or she wishes, but creating more housing stock in a densely populated area is good for all. And this is walking distance to a metro! Ugh. Yes - a developer might convert this into a luxury multi-unit, but more supply entering the market is a GOOD THING. This land in a super prime location is going to be used for a single family when it could house multiple families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I cannot believe that little dump is 1.2…i dont care what you can walk to

Well, buyers in Arlington are paying 1.2 to 1.4 for little dumps that are walkable to nothing. Run a search of recently sold listings.

[Anonymous]

1.2M isn't missing middle. 1.2M is a very expensive house.

House is a dump. It's a tiny post-war rambler. Nothing special about it. Most middle class people live in better housing than this one.

Seller is delusional. House should be torn down. If you want affordable housing, you need density. Replace it with townhouses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it stand up to legal scrutiny?

No, all the new owners have to do is submit for a variance wit the county to subdivide. talk to a local real estate lawyer before purchasong

The covenant is absolutely enforceable if he gets another property owner in the neighborhood to sign onto the agreement.

If I was the neighbor, I would only sign on if the seller agrees to pay all legal costs to enforce it.

Even then…I am skeptical the seller would be available when it comes time to hire a lawyer.

Again….this is why some people really like HOA communities.

[Anonymous]

I regret not buying a house like this in Bridgehampton. Was 1992 and dirt cheap considering.

Was two acres and across the diagonally across the street water.

Owner sold air rights to owner behind and to right of him as those mansions wanted to guarantee water view.

He sold 1.9 acres to town in an easement not to be build on. It left driveway and room a 40x80 one story home. The shack was torn down.

I could have got it 120k.

The rich do this a lot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1.2M isn't missing middle. 1.2M is a very expensive house.

House is a dump. It's a tiny post-war rambler. Nothing special about it. Most middle class people live in better housing than this one.

Seller is delusional. House should be torn down. If you want affordable housing, you need density. Replace it with townhouses.

The seller isn't opposed to the house being torn down. But the covenant he's pushing for says it can only be replaced with a SFH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it stand up to legal scrutiny?

No, all the new owners have to do is submit for a variance wit the county to subdivide. talk to a local real estate lawyer before purchasong

The covenant is absolutely enforceable if he gets another property owner in the neighborhood to sign onto the agreement.

If I was the neighbor, I would only sign on if the seller agrees to pay all legal costs to enforce it.

Even then…I am skeptical the seller would be available when it comes time to hire a lawyer.

Again….this is why some people really like HOA communities.

If I were a neighbor, I would love this and would happily cover my own legal fees to enforce it. My guess is that the seller's neighbors feel the same way -- look on street view, and you'll see lots of recent builds. You really think any of those people want a 6-plex on their street?

[Anonymous]

I totally get why he is doing it. To preserve the character of the neighborhood. Laudible. That said it is covertly racist. I doubt that he even realizes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I totally get why he is doing it. To preserve the character of the neighborhood. Laudible. That said it is covertly racist. I doubt that he even realizes.

I missed the part of the listing that says that a black person cannot buy the house. Can you point it out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I totally get why he is doing it. To preserve the character of the neighborhood. Laudible. That said it is covertly racist. I doubt that he even realizes.

I missed the part of the listing that says that a black person cannot buy the house. Can you point it out?

That would be overtly racist. Covertly racist is when the effect disproportionately effects people of color even if the intent was otherwise. For example, public schools pursuant to federal standards require milk as the drink. Why? It’s not health, although milk has healthy components. It’s because the dairy industry lobbied harder than the orange industry. Did you know that less than 10% of white people are lactose intolerant, approximately 50% of black people are lactose intolerant and over 90% of Asians are lactose intolerant.

I am presuming that the covenant is not intended as racist but it is rather indisputable that single family houses in will attract a higher percentage of white buyers than multi family in the same location.

[Anonymous]

It's overtly classist. Keeping the poors away.

[Anonymous]

What neighborhood? Way to signal that the seller is a belligerent and difficult. That house is on the same block as townhouses, on a street you can hear the traffic on Langton/Rt 29, close to a bus stop that goes to DC. I know because I used to take that bus from Cherrydale to Farragut Square. Someone could build a 4-flat of 2 bedroom apartments with parking in the rear instead of an overpriced oddly shaped “modern” 4-6k sq ft house that will shade the neighbors’ yards.

I live 2 blocks off Wilson Blvd, an easy commute on scooter/bike/bus to 2 Metro stops. These major corridors are the perfect place for Missing Middle. There is a corner lot and a double lot that connect at the end of my block that would be perfect for 2 4-flats or 6-8 modestly sized townhouses. I have lived in other cities where apartments, townhouses, 4-flats, and duplexes all existed peacefully with SFH. Bring on the development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love to see it. “Missing middle” serves to enrich developers and nothing more. Hopefully people have begun to recognize that.

Totally agree and I can't believe how much my lot value has gone up since MM. It's a boomer grab as much as for developers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I totally get why he is doing it. To preserve the character of the neighborhood. Laudible. That said it is covertly racist. I doubt that he even realizes.

I missed the part of the listing that says that a black person cannot buy the house. Can you point it out?

That would be overtly racist. Covertly racist is when the effect disproportionately effects people of color even if the intent was otherwise. For example, public schools pursuant to federal standards require milk as the drink. Why? It’s not health, although milk has healthy components. It’s because the dairy industry lobbied harder than the orange industry. Did you know that less than 10% of white people are lactose intolerant, approximately 50% of black people are lactose intolerant and over 90% of Asians are lactose intolerant.

I am presuming that the covenant is not intended as racist but it is rather indisputable that single family houses in will attract a higher percentage of white buyers than multi family in the same location.

Your argument only holds if the MM units were affordably priced. However, this SFH would be replaced with, at minimum, two units that would EACH sell for 1.2M. Look at ARL real estate for proof.