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.

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.

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].

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:The concern a lot of us have is that Arlington will not apply a new zoning law equally. Face it, this will lower the property values on the street with new MM housing. Arlington tends to do anything that lowers property values only to certain areas-meaning south Arlington. 22204 gets the brunt of affordable housing and schools zoned for mostly affordable housing, all of which keep 22204 much cheaper then the rest of Arlington. We all know that the leafy north Arlington neighborhoods that can hold this kind of additional density will keep developers out. When they complain the county listens. When they scream their schools are over crowded they get new schools.

Concentrated low income housing affects school scores and property values. That’s what is happening in the western past of 22204. MM housing is not low income housing.

I’d rather the county allow smaller lots and build three small SFHs than build a triplex, but I’m guessing north Arlington would object to that too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for it.

Could you be more specific? Which parts and why? Or are you just for maximum density without restriction or regard to infrastructure? Or do you believe the County will be able to work through any infrastructure issues?

I’m fine with all three plans shown. I own in 22207, but my children will not be able to buy here without programs like this. I’m not a boomer.

The concern a lot of us have is that Arlington will not apply a new zoning law equally. Face it, this will lower the property values on the street with new MM housing. Arlington tends to do anything that lowers property values only to certain areas-meaning south Arlington. 22204 gets the brunt of affordable housing and schools zoned for mostly affordable housing, all of which keep 22204 much cheaper then the rest of Arlington. We all know that the leafy north Arlington neighborhoods that can hold this kind of additional density will keep developers out. When they complain the county listens. When they scream their schools are over crowded they get new schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I see your point but in Arlington the problem is that the CB has zero plans for funding all the required infrastructure including schools. Millennials are going to have kids. Our schools are overcrowded, even with Covid departures, and they have zero inclination or opportunity to build more schools. Transportation isn't complete enough to provide bus service into far reaches of the county.

It's a nice idea but cramming more people into a space that doesn't have the necessary infrastructure only hurts both current and new residents.

Arguably, we don’t have the infrastructure to support 6,000 SF McMansions with 5 toilets covering nearly every inch of an 8,000 SF lot, but all we seem to require for those are planter boxes of questionable efficiency and paver stones for their 8-car driveways. Not every smaller home is going to be filled with kids. And at any rate, you use the taxes from these properties to build out the additional marginal infrastructure needed.

I much prefer market solutions to building more homes accessible to a variety of people all over the county, then pretending we are doing our part by giving away a lifetime of free or cheap housing along the Pike to a limited number of poor people who more often than not have zero connection to Arlington and who almost certainly have kids.

I’m a N/A homeowner, by the way.

+100

The bs requirements now for the massive new builds do not account for the impacts of these enormous houses. I also live in N Arlington and I would welcome denser zoning in our neighborhood. If you don't like it, make sure you sell to a family not a developer - funnily, when it comes to their house, most people go for the $$$. I also question the schools issue. Schools are currently overcrowded, but my youngest is 3 and preschools that my older kids were waitlisted for are increasingly advertising openings. Which isn't to say the school age population won't grow, but I'm wondering how big his cohort will be when he gets to elementary school. I generally believe land should be market rate this close to the city - which means if someone values the land enough for a single family home, they can buy it - but if a developer values it more to put a duplex or quadplex up, let them buy it. Then maybe my single friends won't be exiled to Loudon county bc the neighborhood we grew up in is hitting $3-4M homes (which is ridiculous)

That’s an interesting anecdote about the pre schools, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people were keeping their youngest kids home longer bc there aren’t vaccines for them yet.

The people buying houses on Arlington with young kids can afford a SAHM and nanny, so don’t need care and a communal pre school is less cool for now with COVID

Yeah, I’m the PP and that’s kind of what I was getting at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I see your point but in Arlington the problem is that the CB has zero plans for funding all the required infrastructure including schools. Millennials are going to have kids. Our schools are overcrowded, even with Covid departures, and they have zero inclination or opportunity to build more schools. Transportation isn't complete enough to provide bus service into far reaches of the county.

It's a nice idea but cramming more people into a space that doesn't have the necessary infrastructure only hurts both current and new residents.

Arguably, we don’t have the infrastructure to support 6,000 SF McMansions with 5 toilets covering nearly every inch of an 8,000 SF lot, but all we seem to require for those are planter boxes of questionable efficiency and paver stones for their 8-car driveways. Not every smaller home is going to be filled with kids. And at any rate, you use the taxes from these properties to build out the additional marginal infrastructure needed.

I much prefer market solutions to building more homes accessible to a variety of people all over the county, then pretending we are doing our part by giving away a lifetime of free or cheap housing along the Pike to a limited number of poor people who more often than not have zero connection to Arlington and who almost certainly have kids.

I’m a N/A homeowner, by the way.

+100

The bs requirements now for the massive new builds do not account for the impacts of these enormous houses. I also live in N Arlington and I would welcome denser zoning in our neighborhood. If you don't like it, make sure you sell to a family not a developer - funnily, when it comes to their house, most people go for the $$$. I also question the schools issue. Schools are currently overcrowded, but my youngest is 3 and preschools that my older kids were waitlisted for are increasingly advertising openings. Which isn't to say the school age population won't grow, but I'm wondering how big his cohort will be when he gets to elementary school. I generally believe land should be market rate this close to the city - which means if someone values the land enough for a single family home, they can buy it - but if a developer values it more to put a duplex or quadplex up, let them buy it. Then maybe my single friends won't be exiled to Loudon county bc the neighborhood we grew up in is hitting $3-4M homes (which is ridiculous)

That’s an interesting anecdote about the pre schools, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people were keeping their youngest kids home longer bc there aren’t vaccines for them yet.

The people buying houses on Arlington with young kids can afford a SAHM and nanny, so don’t need care and a communal pre school is less cool for now with COVID

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I see your point but in Arlington the problem is that the CB has zero plans for funding all the required infrastructure including schools. Millennials are going to have kids. Our schools are overcrowded, even with Covid departures, and they have zero inclination or opportunity to build more schools. Transportation isn't complete enough to provide bus service into far reaches of the county.

It's a nice idea but cramming more people into a space that doesn't have the necessary infrastructure only hurts both current and new residents.

Arguably, we don’t have the infrastructure to support 6,000 SF McMansions with 5 toilets covering nearly every inch of an 8,000 SF lot, but all we seem to require for those are planter boxes of questionable efficiency and paver stones for their 8-car driveways. Not every smaller home is going to be filled with kids. And at any rate, you use the taxes from these properties to build out the additional marginal infrastructure needed.

I much prefer market solutions to building more homes accessible to a variety of people all over the county, then pretending we are doing our part by giving away a lifetime of free or cheap housing along the Pike to a limited number of poor people who more often than not have zero connection to Arlington and who almost certainly have kids.

I’m a N/A homeowner, by the way.

+100

The bs requirements now for the massive new builds do not account for the impacts of these enormous houses. I also live in N Arlington and I would welcome denser zoning in our neighborhood. If you don't like it, make sure you sell to a family not a developer - funnily, when it comes to their house, most people go for the $$$. I also question the schools issue. Schools are currently overcrowded, but my youngest is 3 and preschools that my older kids were waitlisted for are increasingly advertising openings. Which isn't to say the school age population won't grow, but I'm wondering how big his cohort will be when he gets to elementary school. I generally believe land should be market rate this close to the city - which means if someone values the land enough for a single family home, they can buy it - but if a developer values it more to put a duplex or quadplex up, let them buy it. Then maybe my single friends won't be exiled to Loudon county bc the neighborhood we grew up in is hitting $3-4M homes (which is ridiculous)

That’s an interesting anecdote about the pre schools, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people were keeping their youngest kids home longer bc there aren’t vaccines for them yet.

Anonymous wrote:They should just do this on main roads for now. No need to go into the neighborhoods for this.

They are building mid and high rises on the main roads. Plan Langston Blvd is an example.

They should just do this on main roads for now. No need to go into the neighborhoods for this.

Lolz property vals

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, I see your point but in Arlington the problem is that the CB has zero plans for funding all the required infrastructure including schools. Millennials are going to have kids. Our schools are overcrowded, even with Covid departures, and they have zero inclination or opportunity to build more schools. Transportation isn't complete enough to provide bus service into far reaches of the county.

It's a nice idea but cramming more people into a space that doesn't have the necessary infrastructure only hurts both current and new residents.

Arguably, we don’t have the infrastructure to support 6,000 SF McMansions with 5 toilets covering nearly every inch of an 8,000 SF lot, but all we seem to require for those are planter boxes of questionable efficiency and paver stones for their 8-car driveways. Not every smaller home is going to be filled with kids. And at any rate, you use the taxes from these properties to build out the additional marginal infrastructure needed.

I much prefer market solutions to building more homes accessible to a variety of people all over the county, then pretending we are doing our part by giving away a lifetime of free or cheap housing along the Pike to a limited number of poor people who more often than not have zero connection to Arlington and who almost certainly have kids.

I’m a N/A homeowner, by the way.

+100

The bs requirements now for the massive new builds do not account for the impacts of these enormous houses. I also live in N Arlington and I would welcome denser zoning in our neighborhood. If you don't like it, make sure you sell to a family not a developer - funnily, when it comes to their house, most people go for the $$$. I also question the schools issue. Schools are currently overcrowded, but my youngest is 3 and preschools that my older kids were waitlisted for are increasingly advertising openings. Which isn't to say the school age population won't grow, but I'm wondering how big his cohort will be when he gets to elementary school. I generally believe land should be market rate this close to the city - which means if someone values the land enough for a single family home, they can buy it - but if a developer values it more to put a duplex or quadplex up, let them buy it. Then maybe my single friends won't be exiled to Loudon county bc the neighborhood we grew up in is hitting $3-4M homes (which is ridiculous)