Reply to Arlington "missing middle"

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Arlington "missing middle""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As far as the whole "we need homes for teachers, and cops, etc"

OK, lets just run the numbers then.

a 750,000 duplex, condo, whatever , is a 600k mortgage.  And thats asumming they can scare up 150 to get 20% down and avoid PMI.

Thats still 4k a month.

Who is swinging that?   Not some GS12 and teacher partner.

Just call it what it is- upzoning.   Greater density.  It's not "missing middle", or middle class affordable.   That couple is still going to buy a place for 550 somewhere way farther out. [/quote]

Let's run the numbers. Right now, egg producers are only allowed to produce and sell two sizes of eggs: extra large eggs and small eggs. The middle class can't afford extra large eggs. In the future, however, egg producers will also be allowed to produce and sell "missing middle" eggs, so: extra large eggs, large eggs, medium eggs, and small eggs. In addition, more eggs will be available, total.

Will more people be able to afford eggs once egg producers are also allowed to produce and sell large eggs and medium eggs, and more eggs are available, total?[/quote]

Youre ignoring my point.

So the 750k condo gets bought by... whomever can afford and chooses that.   But it isnt the middle class the plan pretends it will be.

Will that help the overall macro housing shortage?  Sure.   But its being sold as a way to allow teachers and firefighters and whoever to live where they work.  And that is patently false.  [/quote]

The word Middle in missing middle is not “middle class”. It literally refers to a type of housing stock that is missing - townhouses, 4 flats, and mid-rise buildings.

I lived for many years in Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights Ohio, suburbs of Cleveland that have some similarities to N Arlington (Shaker) and S Arlington (CH). I lived in neighborhoods that mixed walkable retail (Westover), townhouses or apartments above retail, large 1890-1940s Tudor and Victorian mansions, “regular” houses similar to the 1940s colonials, and 4-flat buildings with parking behind. It was no issue at all and lead to a vibrant, active neighborhood. Personally I would welcome more of that mix in my neighborhood. [/quote]

Then why is every presentation about all these teachers, cops, etc, etc being able to live here?   Just say what it is.   We want to build 750k condos, that yuppies and retirees will live in.  Upzone the crap out of these currently existing SFH neighborhoods, because that is what is good.

I'm reading in this very thread about how home health workers will be finally able to live in the neighborhood they work in. [/quote]

So the missing middle proposal will decrease property values and cause undesirable people to move in, while also costing too much for the middle class? And it will also exacerbate school crowding while creating housing that families don't want to live in? Amazing.

[/quote]

Opponents simultaneously argue both sides. They oppose missing middle because it‘s not low income housing but also they don’t want developers to build more committed affordable units. They’re concerned about the tree canopy but also opposed to increasing tree canopy requirements for SFHs. [/quote]

I don’t know if I count as an opponent per se (I’m no fan of McMansions being the only housing type going forward), but I’m for a more thoughtful approach to this. I’m fine with more density close to transit (I’m 2 blocks from a metro station and have a good walk score, so I think my street could handle more density than other parts of the county where you’re going to have lots more people with cars). And as someone who owns an older home most of my value is in the land. So upzoning will likely be good for my property value). But I can already barely get my kids into summer camps without the system crashing. The Saturday rec spots that all the working parents want go fast. We went to the library over MLK weekend and it was an absolute zoo. The high schools around here are overcrowded.

The county needs to propose ways to account for more drivers (they want us to be “car light” which my 1 car family is, but also won’t acknowledge that is not possible without more transit throughout the suburban parts of the county). The county also needs to increase its already strained public services and schools. Otherwise this is just an opportunity for developers to make money and dump the fall out on taxpayers.

And I worry this could make the county more unaffordable. I’m someone who was able to eke in as a dual GS14 fed family. We bought an older but liveable home, lived in it a few years, and then renovated. We had to get into bidding wars to get our house. But now people who want to renovate older homes will be competing with developers who see the financial potential of multi family housing, so the land will get bid up even more. This will cause more smaller, older homes to get knocked down and create a new missing housing type. It will be McMansions and multi family. The only older homes that might be safe are those on a weird lot. But I guess I can cash out in 20 years b/c I have a nice flat lot near metro. So if I’m looking at this from a purely selfish perspective I should be for missing middle. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics