Overriding local zoning to allow multi-family units in suburban neighborhoods in VA

[Anonymous]

Oh no, DUPLEXES!!

[Anonymous]

I don't really see this creating low income housing. Consider a typical older lot, $200,000 in land and $250,000 in a single story house. The new duplex isn't going to be $250,000 but likely closer to $400,000 because the only thing it will have less of is bedrooms and bathrooms. The new duplex unit is now $300,000 including land which isn't low income housing but may be affordable now. But why would a developer built such small duplex units? They could easily built a three story duplex and target $300,000 or $400,000 for each unit. You really only split the value of the land without more control over what the developers do.

[Anonymous]

It's not about affordable housing. It's about a give away to developers.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people would duplexes and triplexes would buy into certain areas for schools which could hurt schools with higher FARMS rate. Higher income would move from schools with lower incomes unintentionally creating the opposite of One Fairfax. There'd have to be a guarantee that the housing would be for low-income families.

[Anonymous]

I am thrilled with more affordable housing options in NoVA. I do think the duplexes or apartments would end up being starter homes unless they were specifically designed as affordable. I am in favor of the official designation. I want people to have roofs over their head, jobs, and food.

[Anonymous]

So, you purchase a house in a nice suburban neighborhood. Nothing fancy--not a McMansion. And, next thing you know your neighbor decides to put in a duplex. Parking becomes a problem among other issues.

This proposed law would outlaw jurisdictions from restricting neighborhoods to single family housing. That is the issue. Nothing there about grandfathering neighborhoods that are already zoned single family. Not a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He can put as many duplexes as he wants in McLean. Won’t change the fact that poor people will not be able to afford them. All those extra units will go to young, upper class DINKS. They’ll get a leg up in the housing ladder and build enough equity to move on to a SFH. Go for it.

This. I’ve worked my entire legal career in affordable housing/ section 8 funding/ multi family. The above scenario is exactly what will happen. In order to provide more affordable and work force housing, you need a HUD or other government program. There is just 0 incentive or profit for private developers, even with tax credits. And with the amazon affect, there is even more 0 chance that any duplexs in the future built in single family lots in Arlington/ Alexandria/ McLean/ Falls Church, etc won’t be UMC or higher price point.

Developers are pushing this idea. And then you will start to see individuals try to be their own developer, turning a house into a duplex/ condo situation. And they aren’t going to FARM families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ugh I hate this idea.
Why don’t the new Ds (who I voted for) focus on the stuff most people want that has been stuck - gun control gun control gun control) rather than these extremist policies.

Going too far left will absolutely result in an R governor. See Maryland.

Why? What's bad about allowing duplexes? Not requiring duplexes - just allowing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, you purchase a house in a nice suburban neighborhood. Nothing fancy--not a McMansion. And, next thing you know your neighbor decides to put in a duplex. Parking becomes a problem among other issues.

This proposed law would outlaw jurisdictions from restricting neighborhoods to single family housing. That is the issue. Nothing there about grandfathering neighborhoods that are already zoned single family. Not a good idea.

Oh no?

What "other issues"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He can put as many duplexes as he wants in McLean. Won’t change the fact that poor people will not be able to afford them. All those extra units will go to young, upper class DINKS. They’ll get a leg up in the housing ladder and build enough equity to move on to a SFH. Go for it.

This. I’ve worked my entire legal career in affordable housing/ section 8 funding/ multi family. The above scenario is exactly what will happen. In order to provide more affordable and work force housing, you need a HUD or other government program. There is just 0 incentive or profit for private developers, even with tax credits. And with the amazon affect, there is even more 0 chance that any duplexs in the future built in single family lots in Arlington/ Alexandria/ McLean/ Falls Church, etc won’t be UMC or higher price point.

Developers are pushing this idea. And then you will start to see individuals try to be their own developer, turning a house into a duplex/ condo situation. And they aren’t going to FARM families.

OK, so - they will increase the supply of housing, in areas where people want to live. Why would that be bad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am in favor of property owners being allowed to build duplexes, and I find it difficult to think of any policy argument against it.

The following are not policy arguments:

-I don't want to live near a duplex.
-A duplex would be bad for my property value.
-Ew, duplexes.

Yes, all three of those are totally valid policy arguments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He can put as many duplexes as he wants in McLean. Won’t change the fact that poor people will not be able to afford them. All those extra units will go to young, upper class DINKS. They’ll get a leg up in the housing ladder and build enough equity to move on to a SFH. Go for it.

This. I’ve worked my entire legal career in affordable housing/ section 8 funding/ multi family. The above scenario is exactly what will happen. In order to provide more affordable and work force housing, you need a HUD or other government program. There is just 0 incentive or profit for private developers, even with tax credits. And with the amazon affect, there is even more 0 chance that any duplexs in the future built in single family lots in Arlington/ Alexandria/ McLean/ Falls Church, etc won’t be UMC or higher price point.

Developers are pushing this idea. And then you will start to see individuals try to be their own developer, turning a house into a duplex/ condo situation. And they aren’t going to FARM families.

OK, so - they will increase the supply of housing, in areas where people want to live. Why would that be bad?

The premise was that this law would increase the volume of affordable housing (at least that’s the argument being given by the mayor in Alexandria where I live). So the basis for the entire policy is completely false and misleading.

From an urban planning perspective there are tons of reasons why you cannot just blanket increase housing because more people want to live there. I highly doubt individual developers will be providing proffers to local municipalities to help offset the strain added to the streets, the schools, the infrastructure, the first responder forces, social services, utilities, parking, etc. In somewhere like Alexandria where the public school system is already overstrained, overpopulated and just a mess, the traffic is a mess, that has only one hospital (that is pretty subpar), where crime seems regular, etc. just packing in more housing without smartly addressing urban planning first is just a huge nightmare/mistake.

Read up on urban planning and then come back on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am in favor of property owners being allowed to build duplexes, and I find it difficult to think of any policy argument against it.

The following are not policy arguments:

-I don't want to live near a duplex.
-A duplex would be bad for my property value.
-Ew, duplexes.

So, it is ok for the state to override any local zoning ordinances?

See sanctuary cities/counties both with firearms and illegal immigration.

[Anonymous]

As long as it makes Republicans move!! It a wonderful idea°

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get what you vote for. LMAO as Virginia continues its race to the bottom.

Yet another thing they’ll still be second fiddle to MD at.

MD is in steep decline. VA may get there, but MD has about a 20 year head start.

MD has a Republican Governor to veto this kind of thing, just like MA. Sounds VA need to get on the ball and learn about systemic checks and balances.