Terrible house and agents.

Oh wait, NM. Got it.

Can someone repost the link? OP’s isn’t working for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So do you petition the city to get a new address?

Yes, this is possible. The house in Silver Spring that had two different owners murdered did that.

What?!!!

Yikes, well I don’t feel so bad because it’s not a poor homeowner losing out but a developer who played the odds. When I looked at this house on realtor or Redfin I thought the zoning was only for adu and rental which I thought was odd and likely a mistake. Regardless I’m sure poor developer can sell eventually or rent out. A new Beauvoir family will not be its new owner.

I wouldn’t consider this house even if it came with lifetime free margs across the street.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what SFH-only zoning does to an MFer. Makes no sense to keep a detached SFH there. They should have torn it down. Nothing historic about Cleveland park. It’s a sham to prevent development

I had the opposite take on that. Why on earth would they have allowed that huge building to be build int a SFH neighborhood especially so close to teh house? There is supposed to be a 25-foot rear no build set back! These are obviously very old homes.

Because Wisconsin Ave is a major thoroughfare and is getting up zoned like Connecticut Ave did. Makes no sense to have a detached SFH facing Wisconsin Ave. and NIMBYs fought tooth and nail to restrict Wisconsin’s upzoning to only the first strip of land, creating this funny looking situation with a house facing a wall (lol). That house should be torn down and put up more apartments, albeit gently rising, a la missing middle for a more cohesive look.

You forgot about the 25 foot rear setback that is biblical, so can never be changed. Handed down by Moses. That's why everyone hates European cities- no 25 foot rear setbacks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what SFH-only zoning does to an MFer. Makes no sense to keep a detached SFH there. They should have torn it down. Nothing historic about Cleveland park. It’s a sham to prevent development

I had the opposite take on that. Why on earth would they have allowed that huge building to be build int a SFH neighborhood especially so close to teh house? There is supposed to be a 25-foot rear no build set back! These are obviously very old homes.

Because Wisconsin Ave is a major thoroughfare and is getting up zoned like Connecticut Ave did. Makes no sense to have a detached SFH facing Wisconsin Ave. and NIMBYs fought tooth and nail to restrict Wisconsin’s upzoning to only the first strip of land, creating this funny looking situation with a house facing a wall (lol). That house should be torn down and put up more apartments, albeit gently rising, a la missing middle for a more cohesive look.

Anonymous wrote:This is what SFH-only zoning does to an MFer. Makes no sense to keep a detached SFH there. They should have torn it down. Nothing historic about Cleveland park. It’s a sham to prevent development

I had the opposite take on that. Why on earth would they have allowed that huge building to be build int a SFH neighborhood especially so close to teh house? There is supposed to be a 25-foot rear no build set back! These are obviously very old homes.

Original Listing before the move and big apartment building

https://www.redfin.com/DC/Washington/3219-Wisconsin-Ave-NW-20016/home/9973669

Anonymous wrote:NP - The house absolutely was picked up and moved. It was on a double lot. It was originally where the apartment building was and the got a company to hoist it up and put it in its new spot.

See here:
https://wtop.com/gallery/dc/in-northwest-dc-a-house-gets-ready-for-its-moving-day/

Yes, it was picked up and moved. I watched it happen.

Anonymous wrote:Relatively nice house but my god I would not pay 2.4m for that given it's location (or more specifically, proximity to an apartment building). Some sides of that SFH are literally facing a concrete wall. Also I can see it getting very loud, and also potentially be dark due to shadow cast by the apartment building. Last, there isn't even a backyard in that.

Anyway, terrible purchase for 2.4m, I don't understand why anyone would buy that at that price. For $1.2m sure but not for that. Frankly, they should have just torn it down.

Frankly this whole "historic district" thing makes me laugh. What historic? Just because something is like a 100 years old, doesn't meant it's historic. This isn't Europe where you actual heavy history and historic area, this is America where we don't have that.

When the historical preservation movement really got going in the 60s, it was about preserving truly great and important buildings, like the original Penn Station- it's demolition became the seminal moment for the preservation movement.

Now it has become another tool of NIMBYs along with the environmental review process.

Relatively nice house but my god I would not pay 2.4m for that given it's location (or more specifically, proximity to an apartment building). Some sides of that SFH are literally facing a concrete wall. Also I can see it getting very loud, and also potentially be dark due to shadow cast by the apartment building. Last, there isn't even a backyard in that.

Anyway, terrible purchase for 2.4m, I don't understand why anyone would buy that at that price. For $1.2m sure but not for that. Frankly, they should have just torn it down.

Frankly this whole "historic district" thing makes me laugh. What historic? Just because something is like a 100 years old, doesn't meant it's historic. This isn't Europe where you actual heavy history and historic area, this is America where we don't have that.

Anonymous wrote:So do you petition the city to get a new address?

Well two parts:

1. Lot subdivision to create 2 lots (one for the house, one for the new building). That's with the District government- Office of the Surveyor at Department of Buildings (formerly DCRA).

2. USPS handles addresses for new/renovated buildings.

This is what SFH-only zoning does to an MFer. Makes no sense to keep a detached SFH there. They should have torn it down. Nothing historic about Cleveland park. It’s a sham to prevent development