Missing Middle travesty in Arlington

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

From the article:

“Two full-time workers earning Tokyo’s minimum wage can comfortably afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in six of the city’s 23 wards. By contrast, two people working minimum-wage jobs cannot afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in any of the 23 counties in the New York metropolitan area.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

[Anonymous]

I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

Makes you wonder how the article's claim of only about a quarter of the wards in Tokyo being affordable might play out here. Ginza? Akihabara? (Not sure of spelling. For that matter, not sure of thr relative desirability, but taking neighborhoods I'd seen some time ago.) Are the closer-in areas of the city with nicer environs part of the 25% that exhibits affordability or of the 75% that doesn't? I'd guess the latter, and the same for any area that provides one set or other of desirable housing circumstances.

If you took farther out parts of SE & NE DC, some inner parts of PG, some more far-flung parts of the large surrounding suburban counties and much of the exurban counties, I'm pretty sure you'd find places with affordable rental housing stock. Maybe even 25% of the MSA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

It wasn’t meant to lower prices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

I literally just posted on how Tokyo did that. In the US it is also well known that cities like Houston do a much better job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

Makes you wonder how the article's claim of only about a quarter of the wards in Tokyo being affordable might play out here. Ginza? Akihabara? (Not sure of spelling. For that matter, not sure of thr relative desirability, but taking neighborhoods I'd seen some time ago.) Are the closer-in areas of the city with nicer environs part of the 25% that exhibits affordability or of the 75% that doesn't? I'd guess the latter, and the same for any area that provides one set or other of desirable housing circumstances.

If you took farther out parts of SE & NE DC, some inner parts of PG, some more far-flung parts of the large surrounding suburban counties and much of the exurban counties, I'm pretty sure you'd find places with affordable rental housing stock. Maybe even 25% of the MSA.

Affordable for two low wage workers? Probably not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

I literally just posted on how Tokyo did that. In the US it is also well known that cities like Houston do a much better job.

It is well known that Houston friggin blows, and that referring to how foreign cities supposedly did something or other sounds a lot like talking about your super hot girlfriend in Canada that no one has ever met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

It wasn’t meant to lower prices.

Correct, the purpose was to incentivize middle-sized housing in Arlington, not to lower prices in the DC metro

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

It wasn’t meant to lower prices.

Correct, the purpose was to incentivize middle-sized housing in Arlington, not to lower prices in the DC metro

There's already a ton of "middle-sized" housing in Arlington -- townhouses and condos are everywhere, and there are tons for sale because they are less desirable than houses.

The purpose was that developers wanted to make more money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

It wasn’t meant to lower prices.

Correct, the purpose was to incentivize middle-sized housing in Arlington, not to lower prices in the DC metro

There's already a ton of "middle-sized" housing in Arlington -- townhouses and condos are everywhere, and there are tons for sale because they are less desirable than houses.

The purpose was that developers wanted to make more money.

It there isn’t any demand for them, then the builders won’t build them anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish Arlington had passed a law that would trigger missing middle housing once it was allowed in other nearby counties. Arlington is too small to impact housing prices on its own. But if DC, Fairfax and MoCo also made changes, maybe as could get somewhere.

It wasn’t meant to lower prices.

Correct, the purpose was to incentivize middle-sized housing in Arlington, not to lower prices in the DC metro

There's already a ton of "middle-sized" housing in Arlington -- townhouses and condos are everywhere, and there are tons for sale because they are less desirable than houses.

The purpose was that developers wanted to make more money.

It there isn’t any demand for them, then the builders won’t build them anymore.

Sorry no, the rules of supply and demand do not apply in Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lean Republican or right on most issues but would love to see missing middle housing in Virginia.

Even though the region has natural beauty living in Virginia felt like living in a massive office park with senseless sprawl, below average transit/transportation, relatively low amounts of public greenspace.

Very underwhelming area considered Arlington is 1 mile outside of the capital of the most powerful nation on Earth.

+1. I wish we could cut through partisan noise and have a coalition of people who see that dense housing and urban development are a good thing. There are some philosophical differences about the role of government (central planning of development vs more organic) but you and me both see that the NIMBY mindset is not working.

Why do people assume that increasingly density will lead to lower housing prices? DC has been getting more dense for decades. No one tears down a condo building to build a single family home. It would seem that, as supply goes up, so does demand, which means prices just keep going up.

Increasing supply won’t lower housing prices.

But increasing supply of housing options that are less expensive than $$$$ SFHs increases the supply of less expensive options. Duh.

I think you're missing the point. Increase them all you want. It doesnt mean they're going to remain less expensive. It could make them much more expensive.

Think of it this way: The more people who live in a given area, the more businesses will want to be there because they want a big pool of potential customers. The more businesses move into an area, the more people will want to live there. Which leads to more businesses wanting to move there. Which leads to more people wanting to live there. Which leads to more businesses, etc etc etc.

In that scenario, a one bedroom condo will cost a fortune (see: New York City)

Lol NYC is not a good example of housing production obviously.

Look to Tokyo - they create TONS of housing and hence it is affordable: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html

Y'all are obsessed with supply and completely ignore demand. You need both to arrive at a price. There's five million people in the DMV. Don't you think there's literally millions of people who would like to live in Arlington and have a nice short commute and live in a nice community with great schools? If you don't built enough supply to accommodate the demand (and you can't), then prices will only go up. Affordable housing in Arlington will never, ever happen, no matter what the government does.

I literally just posted on how Tokyo did that. In the US it is also well known that cities like Houston do a much better job.

It is well known that Houston friggin blows, and that referring to how foreign cities supposedly did something or other sounds a lot like talking about your super hot girlfriend in Canada that no one has ever met.

Sure, that’s why Houston has massive population growth …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I have good friends who stepped up and sued Arlington County to stop them from allowing multiple units on single family home lots. They heroically fought the County and WON!!!

Today they texted to say an appellate court overturned the decision!!! She says Arlington is ready to allow this construction within the week.

It’s awful and so discouraging when citizens step up to protect and preserve the character of their neighborhood, and then lose because the Democrat government won’t accept that they have lost. The neighbors should not be expected to litigate again and again. They won and it’s overreach for the appellate court not even living in Arlington to Bigfoot their way in.

How many white "modern farmhouse" McMansions have popped up in her neighborhood that she HASN'T protested? How exactly are those monstrosities preserving the character of her neighborhood? Oh they're not, they're just preserving the WEALTH of her neighborhood. Snobs.