Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

What would non-recklessly increasing density look like to you? And how would you make housing more affordable?

It's not what it would look like to me. This has been studied. you can look at some of the literature on google scholar and from nonprofits who advocate for various solutions.

But off the top of my head:

1. Increase gradually. Don't go from SFH to 8-plexes. Start with SFH to duplexes.
2. Increase first in areas that are already walkable.
3. Increase overall walkability, including better public transportation, sidewalks, lower speed limits, speed bumps, and better intersections (non-pedestrian-friendly intersections can be fixed).
4. Mandate driveways or garages in new construction
5. Build more housing that is actually affordable. The affordable housing units in this area have waiting lists that are what, a year long?
6. Build more schools. This is hard because there is so little land in Arlington, but it can definitely be figured out.
7. Make the current schools better. Hire more guidance counselors, increase lunch space, etc.
8. Follow best practices to make sure that an increase in population density doesn't just mean gentrification. There are some more affordable housing options here, like duplexes, and we need to be sure those don't become expensive 8-plexes.

Now, all of this seems expensive? Yes! Yes it is! But if there isn't the money to increase walkability, they either need to find the money by cutting something else or just not increase population density so quickly.

Agree with all of this. I think increased density is a good thing IFF it’s well thought-out. If the county had a good vision for missing middle - instead of leaving it up to the builders - then I’d fully support it.

And agree with a PP that builders have no overall vision or concern about community. The only way to address that is via zoning. No more Wild West zoning. Even for SFHs, reduce tree loss, oversized homes, etc. Greedy builders will put up the very cheapest specs homes they can get away with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many lots in Arlington are even big enough for an 8-plex?

As I understand it, the new zoning applies to all lots, R5-R20. So in theory, you could build an 8-plex on a smaller lot, just each unit is much smaller. Arlington has a presentation that shows you can build up to 4800 sq ft on an R5-R8 lot. They assume that would be two duplexes at 2400 sq ft each (each of which is bigger than most existing SFHs in Arlington). But as I read it, you could also built 6 800-ft units, or 8 600-ft units. There is no min size.

This is the kind of stuff I'm concerned about with wholescale changes like they are talking about. You may think it's unlikely, and Arlington may too, but if we don't want that to happen, we should not change the code in a way that this is permissible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

MM isn't about affordable housing. It's about offering a wider range of types of houses at a wider range of prices in a wider range of places. A MM duplex is still going to be pretty effing expensive.

Do you see how reckless it is not to increase density? You're advocating for sprawl.

There are going to be more people in the area. Please suggest a realistic place to put them. And if your answer is "Elsewhere. Arlington is full," congratulations, I guess, on making it clear what your values are.

I agree that planning for a larger population is not an Arlington strength. But a lot of the blame falls on citizens who won't accept plans that have a downside for them (such as more traffic in a particular area during school start and end times, or a larger school population at their school, or smaller fields). A lot also lies with the County and School Boards, who give in to whiners and who will announce that something can't be done because it would be hard or expensive (such as working with FC to address traffic at the Carlin Springs/Kenmore site)

But Audrey Clement? She wants a seat so much she'll say anything to get it. No way an actual Green will push back against MM, which is one of the few ways Arlington can do anything to help with sprawl at all.

Huh? No, I didn't say any of that at all. I am for increasing the population density as long as there are plans to handle the impacts of it.

I'd accept the argument that parents blame much of the burden *if* the CB seemed to care about schools at all. But I don't even know when the last time was that they fully funded the schools, and I think that is a bare minimum.

They fully expect a lot of Arlington to go private. That is 100% their plan.

Anonymous wrote:How many lots in Arlington are even big enough for an 8-plex?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

MM isn't about affordable housing. It's about offering a wider range of types of houses at a wider range of prices in a wider range of places. A MM duplex is still going to be pretty effing expensive.

Do you see how reckless it is not to increase density? You're advocating for sprawl.

There are going to be more people in the area. Please suggest a realistic place to put them. And if your answer is "Elsewhere. Arlington is full," congratulations, I guess, on making it clear what your values are.

I agree that planning for a larger population is not an Arlington strength. But a lot of the blame falls on citizens who won't accept plans that have a downside for them (such as more traffic in a particular area during school start and end times, or a larger school population at their school, or smaller fields). A lot also lies with the County and School Boards, who give in to whiners and who will announce that something can't be done because it would be hard or expensive (such as working with FC to address traffic at the Carlin Springs/Kenmore site)

But Audrey Clement? She wants a seat so much she'll say anything to get it. No way an actual Green will push back against MM, which is one of the few ways Arlington can do anything to help with sprawl at all.

Huh? No, I didn't say any of that at all. I am for increasing the population density as long as there are plans to handle the impacts of it.

I'd accept the argument that parents blame much of the burden *if* the CB seemed to care about schools at all. But I don't even know when the last time was that they fully funded the schools, and I think that is a bare minimum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

What would non-recklessly increasing density look like to you? And how would you make housing more affordable?

It's not what it would look like to me. This has been studied. you can look at some of the literature on google scholar and from nonprofits who advocate for various solutions.

But off the top of my head:

1. Increase gradually. Don't go from SFH to 8-plexes. Start with SFH to duplexes.
2. Increase first in areas that are already walkable.
3. Increase overall walkability, including better public transportation, sidewalks, lower speed limits, speed bumps, and better intersections (non-pedestrian-friendly intersections can be fixed).
4. Mandate driveways or garages in new construction
5. Build more housing that is actually affordable. The affordable housing units in this area have waiting lists that are what, a year long?
6. Build more schools. This is hard because there is so little land in Arlington, but it can definitely be figured out.
7. Make the current schools better. Hire more guidance counselors, increase lunch space, etc.
8. Follow best practices to make sure that an increase in population density doesn't just mean gentrification. There are some more affordable housing options here, like duplexes, and we need to be sure those don't become expensive 8-plexes.

Now, all of this seems expensive? Yes! Yes it is! But if there isn't the money to increase walkability, they either need to find the money by cutting something else or just not increase population density so quickly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

What would non-recklessly increasing density look like to you? And how would you make housing more affordable?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

MM isn't about affordable housing. It's about offering a wider range of types of houses at a wider range of prices in a wider range of places. A MM duplex is still going to be pretty effing expensive.

Do you see how reckless it is not to increase density? You're advocating for sprawl.

There are going to be more people in the area. Please suggest a realistic place to put them. And if your answer is "Elsewhere. Arlington is full," congratulations, I guess, on making it clear what your values are.

I agree that planning for a larger population is not an Arlington strength. But a lot of the blame falls on citizens who won't accept plans that have a downside for them (such as more traffic in a particular area during school start and end times, or a larger school population at their school, or smaller fields). A lot also lies with the County and School Boards, who give in to whiners and who will announce that something can't be done because it would be hard or expensive (such as working with FC to address traffic at the Carlin Springs/Kenmore site)

But Audrey Clement? She wants a seat so much she'll say anything to get it. No way an actual Green will push back against MM, which is one of the few ways Arlington can do anything to help with sprawl at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that people young enough to have kids in APS don't support MM. In my neighborhood, the anti-MM are mostly elderly or people in bigass new builds who go private.

Because young APS parents like me tend not to suffer as much from some common Boomer and Gen Xer afflictions: view homes as retirement accounts, fear of neighborhood change, anxiety over more neighbors, lack of faith in government’s ability to solve problems, and expectation that housing policy should be geared toward juicing property values. Perks of not growing up steeped in Reaganism?

Millennial homeowner here. If I was only concerned about home value I’d be pro-missing middle.

I’m pro-affordable housing, not in favor of recklessly increasing population density with no plan for the impacts of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s depressing how many homeowners are so committed to maintaining exclusionary zoning that they’ll vote for a candidate they know will do a miserable job.

Not committed to exclusionary zoning. I'm just asking them to build a 4th high school first!

So committed that you’ll vote for an unqualified candidate because you’re demanding a new school that the county board doesn’t decide whether to build and that projections show we don’t need. Congratulations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s depressing how many homeowners are so committed to maintaining exclusionary zoning that they’ll vote for a candidate they know will do a miserable job.

I would support MM if they were talking about duplexes with one required parking space off-street per unit. But quads or more with 0.5 spaces per unit is insane. Plus anything above a duplex is not creating new home ownership opportunities at a lower price point, which is the problem MM is supposed to be solving. Also, if you think it's only going to be 20 units a year (I find that laughable), gradually implement it and only allow 20 the first year to assess demand before you throw existing zoning laws out the window. It's a crazy idea.

Anonymous wrote:I have voted for Clement in the past, but I'm not sure I can do it again. I may vote Theo as my protest my vote. And I don't even really have strong feelings about MM one way or the other. Just hate one-party rule.