Anonymous wrote:This is how you know that all the NIMBYs who claim "I just want the character of the neighborhood to be the same as when I moved in" are full of it. It is and always has been about racism and denying access to people they think are lesser than them.

If what they actually cared about was their own personal experience in the neighborhood, there would be absolutely no reason to care about what happens to your house when you leave the neighborhood.

Shame on all the disgusting people applauding this, you're the dregs of humanity.

The racism is in your imagination. The seller wanted it to be a SFH -- no limitation on who can buy that SFH.

MM was never about remedying past discrimination or exclusionary policies. You were told lies by the MM proponents, and you're clinging to those lies.

Social justice warrior has entered the room

This is how you know that all the NIMBYs who claim "I just want the character of the neighborhood to be the same as when I moved in" are full of it. It is and always has been about racism and denying access to people they think are lesser than them.

If what they actually cared about was their own personal experience in the neighborhood, there would be absolutely no reason to care about what happens to your house when you leave the neighborhood.

Shame on all the disgusting people applauding this, you're the dregs of humanity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

So a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing is getting more multifamily housing? I thought the NIMBYs were mad because MFH was going to ruin SFH neighborhoods (although honestly, I can't think of any SFH neighborhoods except for some in way north Arlington, which is unlikely to become a magnet for MFH anyway)

Yes. I think almost all applications have only been in neighborhoods that already have a lot of multifamily. Some of that makes sense, like near Clarendon/Metro.

The example I am talking about is just a way that a developer is making more money with 2 nonconforming lots that they couldn’t figure out how to build giant SFHs on for max profit. And it shouldn’t have been approved because it really is a big middle finger to the SFHs on that street. And especially when all someone in those leafy NA neighborhoods with $$$ just has to hint that they might sue and the builders stop even talking about a duplex. But sure, just add 12 more units here in SA because the family across the street is Hispanic and works blue collar jobs.

You're posting this in a thread that started by discussing a listing in NA. (A listing that would be an excellent candidate for a duplex)

Yes, and it will become a duplex when pigs fly. Meanwhile, all of South Arlington will be turned into multifamily housing thanks to a scattershot policy that doesn’t do anything to address historic injustices and inequity and rather reinforce at every turn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle, new word(s) of the day!

Not new -- it's been discussed for years.

Just asked five coworkers and their response was " missing middle what?" 🤣

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle, new word(s) of the day!

Not new -- it's been discussed for years.

Anonymous wrote:Missing Middle, new word(s) of the day!

Missing Middle has been replaced by Expanded Housing Options --

Missing Middle, new word(s) of the day!

There’s an estate sale at this house this weekend! I saw it on MaddytheB’s IG and thought the address sounded familiar. So if you want to go check it out and see what’s so special about keeping it a SFH, you can now walk right in and maybe come home with some tchotchkes as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

So a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing is getting more multifamily housing? I thought the NIMBYs were mad because MFH was going to ruin SFH neighborhoods (although honestly, I can't think of any SFH neighborhoods except for some in way north Arlington, which is unlikely to become a magnet for MFH anyway)

Yes. I think almost all applications have only been in neighborhoods that already have a lot of multifamily. Some of that makes sense, like near Clarendon/Metro.

The example I am talking about is just a way that a developer is making more money with 2 nonconforming lots that they couldn’t figure out how to build giant SFHs on for max profit. And it shouldn’t have been approved because it really is a big middle finger to the SFHs on that street. And especially when all someone in those leafy NA neighborhoods with $$$ just has to hint that they might sue and the builders stop even talking about a duplex. But sure, just add 12 more units here in SA because the family across the street is Hispanic and works blue collar jobs.

You're posting this in a thread that started by discussing a listing in NA. (A listing that would be an excellent candidate for a duplex)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

So a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing is getting more multifamily housing? I thought the NIMBYs were mad because MFH was going to ruin SFH neighborhoods (although honestly, I can't think of any SFH neighborhoods except for some in way north Arlington, which is unlikely to become a magnet for MFH anyway)

Yes. I think almost all applications have only been in neighborhoods that already have a lot of multifamily. Some of that makes sense, like near Clarendon/Metro.

The example I am talking about is just a way that a developer is making more money with 2 nonconforming lots that they couldn’t figure out how to build giant SFHs on for max profit. And it shouldn’t have been approved because it really is a big middle finger to the SFHs on that street. And especially when all someone in those leafy NA neighborhoods with $$$ just has to hint that they might sue and the builders stop even talking about a duplex. But sure, just add 12 more units here in SA because the family across the street is Hispanic and works blue collar jobs.

All you need to do is remember how developer-centric this whole thing is. In many cases, if not most, the relative return on a multiplex is better in more moderately priced locations than in higher-priced locations where a lot might cost more, but a larger detached house built there can be resold for $MM, almost certainly more than the sum of sales from a multiplex build in that location.

To make a multi-unit build command such a sum, not only would the property likely need to be larger, but the construction cost would escalate considerably more than the same for the single unit. Not impossible, and not necessarily unprofitable, but a multi-unit build in such an area is far less likely to be the most profitable option for a developer, whereas it is much more likely to be so in a lower-cost area.

Greater protections need to be built into these initiatives if they aren't to result merely in widening the gap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

So a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing is getting more multifamily housing? I thought the NIMBYs were mad because MFH was going to ruin SFH neighborhoods (although honestly, I can't think of any SFH neighborhoods except for some in way north Arlington, which is unlikely to become a magnet for MFH anyway)

Yes. I think almost all applications have only been in neighborhoods that already have a lot of multifamily. Some of that makes sense, like near Clarendon/Metro.

The example I am talking about is just a way that a developer is making more money with 2 nonconforming lots that they couldn’t figure out how to build giant SFHs on for max profit. And it shouldn’t have been approved because it really is a big middle finger to the SFHs on that street. And especially when all someone in those leafy NA neighborhoods with $$$ just has to hint that they might sue and the builders stop even talking about a duplex. But sure, just add 12 more units here in SA because the family across the street is Hispanic and works blue collar jobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

So a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing is getting more multifamily housing? I thought the NIMBYs were mad because MFH was going to ruin SFH neighborhoods (although honestly, I can't think of any SFH neighborhoods except for some in way north Arlington, which is unlikely to become a magnet for MFH anyway)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The seller wants to keep his neighborhood a wealthy enclave and free of the undesirable middle class. I appreciate the transparency.

It’s not middle class. It’s other wealthy people buying this stuff. They just needed the MC renters to do the developers dirty work. I don’t think a single MM project that was available for purchase is less than $1.2M

Right. I live in Green Valley in Arlington, so maybe the least desirable Arlington neighborhood? lol. These three townhome took the spot of one SFH. And they sold for 1 million.

https://www.redfin.com/VA/Arlington/2136-S-Nelson-St-22204/home/172271124

I believe Green Valley has been excluded from Missing Middle, but that does not mean private developers cannot buy lots and have them rezoned to townhouse zoning.

No neighborhoods were excluded from EHO, which is my problem with it.

I had also heard that Green Valley and Penrose were excluded from EHO and one of the civic leaders in Halls Hill is trying to exclude that community. I believe there were about 150 properties excluded from EHO in these areas: Columbia Pike Special Revitalization District, the Cherrydale Revitalization Plan, and near the East Falls Church Metro.

I also have information from Arlington County saying that Missing Middle would improve homeownership opportunities for buyers but the implications was it was for "middle class" households who could not afford a $1.3M townhouse which Missing Middle will provide. That's why the name was changed from Missing Middle to Expanded Housing Opportunities.

No neighborhoods were excluded unless they are covered by another GLUP. It’s crap because exactly as predicted, a neighborhood near mine is getting TWO six plexes in the middle of a SFH street. This is a neighborhood that already has multifamily housing, including multiple CAF buildings, and is zoned to Title 1 schools. This should never have been allowed. Why should this neighborhood, that’s already diverse in every sense of the word, be subject to a blanket policy that is meant to expand housing options in areas that don’t have options? Also, it’s not near public transit, and it’s probably the narrowest street in the neighborhood. It shouldn’t have 12 additional housing units, and certainly not before 10,000 sq ft lots near the FC Metro get them.

^didn't not did