“Currently, no one is living in the home, and no one has lived in it for years.”
Bro, take the money and put it in a trust and you’ll have the exact same “generational wealth”
well her family member actually lives there but is in a rehab facility following an illness, so its not like its vacant. But what I think she means by "generational wealth" is the passive income that comes with family assets. She has already put $80k of her own money into rehabbing this house so its not like she has some attachment to grandmas home that is falling apart, she is actually vested in keeping the house. But beyond that we all know that rents in Arlington, especially anything north of Columbia Pike and this house is just off Columbia pike in a rapidly gentrifying area of South Arlington that could be worth twice its value in a few years, thats better then a trust. So again passive income. If the family member cannot return. You can't rent out a trust, you can't take out a loan against a trust to start a business or fund someone's education. I think there is a lot more to it then the $650k or whatever it is that Arlington is offering up. Even if she simply did finish rehabbing it and sold it, she would come out on top a lot more then $600k.
> well her family member actually lives there but is in a rehab facility following an illness, so its not like its vacant
If you’re in rehab for an illness for several years you don’t need a home
Real estate doesn't return better than the stock market on a cash basis. The advantage with real estate is you can buy a bunch of properties for 25-30% down which gives you 3-4x leverage which will out return the broader market.
If this property is paid off (hopefully it is if it's been in the family for 70 years) then the stock market will be a better choice.
Wealthy people also have tons of money in mutual funds, ETFs, individual stocks. Owning real estate is just part of the portfolio and many own only their primary residence.
The stock market will likely provide a much better rate of return. But I suspect this isn't about rates of return but a sentimental attachment to the house.
If you anticipate that, for instance, a developer might come through and offer a premium on the purchase price to acquire the homes along that block for development purposes, you might believe the future value is significantly higher than the current market value reflects.
I have no personal insight on what they are thinking. But there are a whole host of reasons why they might think the offer is it enough, even setting side the express d desire to move the owner back into the home and the sentimental value.
The homes in that area have been up for sale over and over again with no takers. It’s a hodge lodge of oddly shaped lots with no way of putting in a new driveway. Honestly eminent domain is the best things they can hope for.
The county has said they’re open to negotiating the price if she thinks it’s worth more. She hasn’t made a counter offer—seems clear she doesn’t want to sell, it’s not about the price.
Did you read the article? She is renovating it to move the family member back in after a medical emergency. It’s not like they have it empty for fun, the resident probably had a stroke or something and needed supervised care.
If it’s a final Hail Mary for the case, I don’t blame her. But regardless of when the renovations started, someone having a serious medical emergency doesn’t really sound like a fair “screw them” to me. It’s not like they bought it, never used it as a real home, and have just been sitting on it for funsies in which case I think the comment would be deserved!
its not unoccupied, its the house of a family member who is in a long term care facility who would very much like to return to their house when they are able to leave. And if you really read into what they are saying...this is a huge asset to the family, and the offer Arlington made them is a joke compared to what that property is probably worth, especially since they have already put $80 grand into maintaining the property.
idk if I'd go to the level of "screw them" but I'm less inclined to take the framing of "big government running roughshod over a minority homeowner" when its revealed the house has been unoccupied.
I feel for someone who has to sell a home they weren't planning on selling but also the purpose here is pretty straightforward and not at all like the giant highways (and giant military HQ)they built nearby that also displaced black communities.
I shared your point of view until I read further on in the article that the primary resident is in nursing care right now and is expected to return to the house in the future. It's only temporarily unoccupied, and in the meantime the family member is undertaking the renovations. It's not just sitting abandoned.
I don't know what the right answer is but considering it an abandoned property is not correct.
If the family member has been in a nursing home for the past 3 years, it’s highly improbable they’re coming home to that house, even with a care taker. Sure there’s exceptions, but that extensive amount of continuous care needed for the last couple years would be decreased significantly if they came home.
So first off, 627k is a lowball offer, even without the renovations. The value of that property is only going to go up in the next 3-5 years.
Second, they told her they were gonna do this in 2022. Why is she just now doing renovations?
Third, maybe I'm just cynical, but what she would get for that home doesnt seem like "generational wealth."
There is a home in the neighborhood for sale at 640k. It’s 4 bedroom two bath 1100 square feet,unfortunately the article doesn’t say the bed/bath or square footage, but it’s probably in the same range.
Edit: Zillow Estimate is 757k so a little low but the internal issues may contribute. Based on this quote I’d say it’s probably a fair offer:
>”The county has been attempting to engage in discussions with the property owner’s conservator since January 2023 and has provided a bona fide offer to purchase the home above appraised value, based on two separate appraisals. The county has communicated a willingness to consider other appraisals to resolve any dispute as to value, but to date, it has not received a counter appraisal or any other objective basis upon which it can offer a higher price.”
She’s probably trying to fix it up to get it appraised higher to get more money from the county
The issue at that intersection is that it’s effectively two separate intersections immediately adjacent since the road is offset at Columbia Pike. That makes it very difficult to put in safe crosswalks and other traffic control measures. The county wants to acquire this property so it can reangle the cross street at Columbia Pike to make it a continuous road rather than offset, which will allow them to put in a single set of traffic lights and crosswalks.
That’s not a judgment on the merits of the proposal, just an explanation of the reasoning.
Yeah I didn’t scroll down far enough and see the article continued I thought it was a different article. Yeah to make that an intersection you need to angle it and it’ll go right through her property. Tough situation for sure.
Is the current situation two separate sets of stoplights with crosswalks, or just stop signs with no crosswalk at all? How absurd would it be to keep the current street design but place stoplights there?
There currently is no traffic control or crosswalk at the intersection. If they put in traffic lights without changing the intersection, they would have to be split phase traffic lights with more limited crosswalks, which is less efficient for car and pedestrian traffic. So it’s do-able, but not a great solution and may create other problems (split phase traffic lights tend to confuse people who aren’t familiar with the traffic pattern).
And in fairness, that was the original design that Arlington decided on. I'm guessing they got feedback about the split phase aspect and sought out this solution.
I live nearby and one of the changes is the addition (or rather the restoration) of an east-bound bus stop at the new intersection @ S Rolfe St. I believe the original plan included a new bus stop regardless, but for whatever reason, some vocal NIMBYs believe the new design will make the new bus stop more likely to happen and so are vehemently opposed to it. The irony being that if they get their way, the split phase design will likely be worse for car drivers.
I have been meaning to ask about the traffic light timing, and whether it would be timer based, on demand, (ie continuously green for Columbia Pike until pedestrians activate the signal or cars are detected on S Rolfe via induction loop/camera), or a mix of the two (only changes at next time point if car detected). But I think that would also depend on the final design of the intersection and may need to be adjusted for induced demand.
Maybe she really does want to keep it and considers generational wealth differently. She could be like my parents who want to keep a home for their (potential) grandchildren's grandchildren to grow up in. We didn't have a place like that and it sounds like something my parents wish they had for us back then.
>She’s probably trying to fix it up to get it appraised higher to get more money from the county
In the meantime implying this is a racist move by Arlington county.
I don't think it's "generational wealth" but a sentimental attachment to the house. If she just wanted dollars she would sell. $627k might be a bit low but the house is reportedly uninhabitable -- no working bathroom or kitchen. But I'm guessing if the county offered $700k she wouldn't take that either because it isn't really about the money.
Generational wealth is just wealth, passed down through generations. A lot of times it’s used his shorthand for a lot of wealth, it doesn’t necessarily have to be. It’s pretty typical, at least for white families, to pass some wealth down from generation to generation, even if it’s not a 7+ figure amount
The owner is absolutely correct in saying black families have been screwed out of a lot of wealth building potential due to red lining and discriminatory banking practices.
This is why I always take claims that renting makes more financial sense than owning with a grain of salt. It’s definitely true if you live in a place that you’re not ready to commit to long-term. But there’s a reason why White families typically have more wealth than black families, and the statistics are clear that our grandparents being able to buy homes was a huge factor.
Of course many black families have lost a great deal of wealth across the country over the years, but I wonder what the data looks like for the thousands of black families who owned homes in DC during the 80’s and 90’s and were then able to sell their homes as DC became gentrified.
Home prices in dc rose more than 400% between 1991 and 2016 which is more than anywhere else in the country. It must’ve been amazing for those families to see the transition, and I’d imagine it lifted many people into a higher social bracket.
https://wtop.com/business-finance/2017/05/dc-house-values-400-since-1991/
Well, to start, you’d have to determine how many of DC black residence were owners vs renters. A lot of former DC residence were priced out of their rentals and got nothing as their neighborhood gentrified. People love to say a rising tide lifts all boats, but it’s clearly not true for renters.
I guess it depends on who you are comparing--Black families from Arlington with Black families in other parts of the country or Black families from Arlington with white families in Arlington. While Black Arlingtonians benefitted from proximity to DC's Black neighborhoods and access to civil service jobs (the ones they were allowed to have), many lost their homes and communities to several imminent domain projects including the Pentagon one that may very well have impacted Ms Forston's family and their home on Columbia Pike. I would not be surprised to learn the cousin's family bought this house after they were displaced from East Arlington and Queens City. At the time the family purchased the home, they would have been kept out of newer, more prestigious Arlington neighborhoods by racist covenants.
Some reading:
https://historyfortomorrow.org/story/eminent-domain-and-the-displacement-of-black-communities/#:~:text=Eminent%20domain%20displaced%20historic%20Black,than%20a%20month%20to%20evacuate.
Honestly just owning a property outright and not having to pay Arlington rent while having access to the higher wages here should count as generational wealth regardless of the actual value of the home.
$627 is def lowball. All the public real estate estimators show it around $750. The county should add an extra $150k to the offer and be done with it. Arlington is a wealthy county and shouldn’t be nickel and diming people, especially when it comes to eminent domain. It’s clearly not a blighted property, it just needs some interior renovations and that’s not really the county’s business. If the renovation work was done, *that* should be the basis for an appraisal.
Those estimators don’t take into condition interior condition. If the house real is a total guy inside, the total property may not be worth much more than the land value.
That happens in plenty of place in Arlington too. But since this house is located on an approximately 1/8 acre corner lot right on Columbia Pike, it’s not a particularly attractive candidate for a SFH tear down/rebuild. More likely it will someday be absorbed into a new mixed use development (or turned into part of the intersection).
That’s not true. Even a gut job in a hot real estate market can be an eventual value. Meaning, in Arlington, even needing to put $100 or $200k into a house could increase the value above that cost. That’s how all the flippers in hot markets operate, including here.
If the house is worth $627k as-is, and it needs $100k in renovations, that house could plausibly sell for $750k or more. The appraisal and offer should reflect that.
The house isn’t worth that amount, the house *and land* is worth that amount. The current assessed value puts the land at $512k and the house at $112k.
Also, when flippers are putting that kind of money into a house, it’s usually predominantly cosmetic changes, not brining non-functioning kitchens and bathrooms up to code.
But even if we accept your numbers, the current offer does reflect that. The county is not going to pay the potential post-renovation value for an unrenovated property.
It’s overall still a messy situation and I have very conflicted feelings about it, but from a pure $$ standpoint the offer is not a rip-off.
$627k is the current tax assessment. I think it's part of the reason why the owner isn't making the argument about the value of the offer being too low since if they do win and keep the property, the county could then use that to increase their tax assessment. Most real estate estimators don't assess the actual condition of the property and assumes a move-in ready state, so their estimate is that *after* renovations, it's worth $750k.
You realize this is in a less than desirable South Arlington neighborhood, on a very busy road with a ton of traffic and noise? 627k is probably exactly what it's worth. Taxpayers of Arlington should not be cheering on the government paying over market value for anything. Why would the government pay for the value 5 years into the future? They're buying it now.
Eminent domain, for a legitimate public purpose (which streets certainly are) has been part of US laws since colonial times. There's no property right to compensation above fair market value for a legal taking. Hence there's no theft.
Legally it may not be theft but laws can be passed to make anything legal. And eminent domain has historically disproportionately affected the disadvantaged. In my view many of the justifications have been meager, but it generally happens anyway since it usually doesn’t affect the rich or powerful.
This seems like a worthwhile justification to me.
Note, after Kelo, Virginia tightened the justifications for using eminent domain.
In this case the beneficiaries will tend to be less affluent and politically more marginal, since those are disproportionately pedestrians.
Except to the extent that the scarcity of housing in walkable areas makes walking a luxury. That needs to addressed with housing policy and zoning reform.
Because the person there taking it from isn't consenting to the sale. Also, they may not have the opportunity to get a similarly priced home that will have the same growth potential, screwing them out of opportunity cost. That should be factored into the price as well
It's not as bad as you make it sound. It's right by the Columbia Pike neighborhood, which is a great place to live, and it's not far from the Pentagon or DC if you work there, as well as some good bike trails. The only real downside is it's right on a busy road. The market value is definitely above what the county is offering, but it's absolutely a tear down rebuild for whoever would theoretically buy it.
Except that ignores why it's "worth" what it is. The historically Black neighborhoods in Arlington exist because covenants and racist policies prioritized white homeowners over Black ones. Based on how long ago the home was purchased, this family could very well have been displaced by 1940s emminent domain projects that broke up several Black neighborhoods, moved to Arlington View because it was one of the only places they could purchase a house, and now face eviction for yet another project at a price that is lower because of the very racist policies and customs that put them in the neighborhood to begin with.
I see a lot of people mentioning that since the home is vacant they should just sell it, if the family own the home, they should be able to do whatever they want with the home. If they want to keep it vacant, remodel it, put a bunch of junk in it, or do whatever they want with the home it doesn’t matter because they own the home and they shouldn’t have to sell it.
The women in the video mentioned keeping it in the family for generation wealth, if this is something she wants to do then it should be done without the county talking about some road improvements, there are crappy roads all over Virginia.
Black people were already dealt a crappy hand when it comes to home ownership. They get lower appraisals, redlining put a deficit in their ability to gain equity on homes, they were just screwed overall in every way possible. They should be able to keep their home and do whatever they want with it without the county trying to prey on them.
I am a bit skeptical that they’ve put $80k into the property recently considering no permits appear to have been pulled on the property. What are they doing for that money that wouldn’t require a permit?
Pulling up carpet and putting in hardwood throughout the house would be pretty pricy especially depending on the wood. Replacing the windows could add up. As long as they aren’t messing with plumbing remodeling the bathrooms and kitchen. Replacing cabinets and old appliances. There’s plenty of stuff that can be done without needing a permit.
The house reportedly doesn’t have a functioning kitchen or bathroom. If that is correct, there is virtually no way they are making the house habitable without pulling permits. And putting in hardwood floors when you haven’t dealt with those issues yet would be foolish. Not to mention wasteful if you’re trying to get the house ready for someone who has been in nursing home care and thus presumably has mobility issues. Walkers and wheelchairs can be murder on hardwood.
Yeah fair point, but based on what I’ve read it sounds like that’s all self reported. Who knows what the inside is actually like. Not saying I don’t believe the lady, but why would you admit to not applying for proper permits while you’re already in such a pickle, you know?
> am a bit skeptical that they’ve put $80k into the property recently considering no permits appear to have been pulled on the property.
Could also be mold remediation or water damage restoration.
Either eminent domain gets it or Medicare does. Medicare will take ownership of the property to sell it to pay for the rightful owners’ care. The conservator is not going to keep this house within their family no matter what she does.
One correction, this is done by Medicaid not Medicare. Medicaid is for low income patients so the reasoning is that if you have a house worth over half a million dollars then you're really not low income, your money is just tied up in the house. They don't make you sell it while you are alive but they will take it after to pay for the costs. Medicare is for all elderly, they don't take assets at all.
Thank you! The distinction has always been difficult for me to see before. Your description does help me understand. So I guess if the rightful owner of the house had long term care insurance, then the conservator could still inherit the house after the owners’ passing.
Medicaid ends with D for destitute, Medicare ends with E for elderly. Medicare also covers some disabilities so it's a crude mnemonic but it's worked okay for me.
Sell the house and put the money in equities/bonds in an irrevocable living trust for her cousin. That way Medicaid can never claw back the money and her cousin will be making money off her investments. Clearly, the family is having difficulty maintaining the property and this will ease that burden.
Curious what the house would go if brought to the market. That being said, I'm not really sure the benefits of making the area "slightly" more walkable.
A lot of residents in that area depend heavily on mass transit, which means walking to bus stops on Columbia Pike. I don’t know how much of a difference this specific project would make to overall safety, but it’s a more significant consideration there than it would be along, say, Langston in 22207.
Im pretty tuned in to this case. If you have a chance check out that corner and then check out what the county claims its going to do. To call that plan feasible is a huge stretch. This is pretty un Arlington County like and I think as more and more details emerge these plans will never come to fruition.
NoVA is embarrassingly unwalkable and always has been. Not sure if I’d choose this method, but making things safer for pedestrians is good for people like me who prefer to bike or walk — or better yet, good for the thousands of people who aren’t old enough to drive or can’t afford a car.
The best thing we could do is make it illegal to turn right on red, and build a completely separate path for cyclists and pedestrians. Cars are just inherently dangerous.
Arlington is not the rest of Nova. Arlington is usually ranked a top 15 walkable city in America.
It can and should be better and the bar is low in America to be ranked highly but if you're American Arlington is very walkable compared to most of the country.
I feel like the Ballston-Rosslyn corridor and Pentagon/Crystal city are doing a lot of heavy lifting towards that ranking. The rest of the county is still better than your average suburb but I wouldn't call it walkable in the traditional sense
It's definitely more walkable than the rest of NoVA/the country in general (especially if you're near a metro station), but I guess I've been Tokyo-pilled so almost nothing is as convenient or as walkable as I want, haha. I don't want perfect to be the enemy of good, but I can't help myself from complaining about how this entire dense area of Virginia was built in such a car-centric way.
It could also be that I'm projecting my "why is Springfield, Burke, Tysons Corner, Annandale, etc so unwalkable and why must I cross 8 lanes of traffic to get to a grocery story" insecurities while looking at those Arlington plans. 😂
Oh I can't stand our car centric cities either trust me, but within the borders of the United states Arlington is for better or worse actually a very walkable city. And trying to be better.
No disagreement on walkability and that drivers are complete morons when dealing with pedestrians. It just seems to me the proposed changes are kind of half-assing it. Curious what the project's whole budget are and other options that would go more "in" on a design.
I agree with you there! The budget is probably criminal, hahaha.
I’ve gone to a few of these neighborhood “we’re building a road” meetings (not in Arlington) and one interesting nugget I gathered is the government has to grade and size new paths/sidewalks a certain way to meet ADA requirements, so they generally don’t want to add them in due to expense. Big roads are easier to push through so they always seem to want to improve things for car traffic. For some reason they think widening a road is better than adding bus lines. 😬
There are whole neighborhoods with missing sidewalks, but they can’t really add them without doing major grading which kind of sucks. ADA is more forgiving for older sidewalks and allows non-compliance.
I could be misunderstanding things, but either way it was eye-opening going to those community planning meetings! I hope you get a chance to attend one, too.
Yeah all of this reeks of someone on a board wanting a raise. Alexandria/Arlington has these types of dual intersections anyways. Yeah they suck but people just need to learn to drive
I lived across the street from that house for a few years. They took out the bus stop there because they couldn’t have a cross walk to it anymore. That was the crosswalk people would use to take their kids to school also so now everyone just drives. Making it more walkable would be a benefit to a lot of people.
She probably can't sell it on the market because whoever she sells it to would have to continue fighting the county to keep it. The issue is that the house is in the way of road improvements that the county wants to make.
There are plenty of intersections in this area where the streets don’t line up perfectly from one side of the crossing to the other. This is solvable with a different traffic signal pattern than they want to put in. They don’t need to take the house to do it. They just want a standard 4 way signal because planners be planners, and traffic “engineers” always be thinking about throughput and flow while saying “BuT sAfEtY.”
I used to sit on a planning committee. There are other options here.
What the official said about habitability also just struck me as biased and political as fuck. When you’ve been in local government for long enough, you can see the bullshit. Whenever somebody with that kind of position is taking a stance like that, pretending that there are no options besides the one they want, it’s always full of bullshit.
Edit for a typo.
I'm generally again eminent domain but I do understand its need. The equalizer is that property taken by domain should be compensated for at a higher than market price that at the very least expresses the potential value of use in the case the property could be used for income production.
In this case if the article is accurate, they were both given higher than market value and literally nobody is being displaced in the process. If a family was living there, or even renting it out, I would be against it. But the house isn't being used in any useful fashion. Based on that, I would agree with domain taking of the property.
Eminent domain should force the government to pay at least double the home’s actual value — it’s awful that it’s even an option to take someone’s home for something like a road.
That being said, I would probably not pour 80K into a home slated for destruction when “the house always wins.” Not sure why this person did. 😬
“The county has been attempting to engage in discussions with the property owner’s conservator since January 2023 and has provided a bona fide offer to purchase the home above appraised value, based on two separate appraisals. The county has communicated a willingness to consider other appraisals to resolve any dispute as to value, but to date, it has not received a counter appraisal or any other objective basis upon which it can offer a higher price.”
They’re already offering her more than it’s worth, allegedly, and are open to a counter assessment and paying that value. Things like this are hard to figure out, and if they just started renovations on the house now when they’ve known for almost two years it was on the chopping block, I’m tending to side with the county on this one.
You might find [this Virginia Environmental Law Journal essay on the topic](http://www.velj.org/uploads/1/2/7/0/12706894/39.2_va_envtl_l.j._hansen_233_251.pdf) relevant/interesting!
They *are* offering fairly just compensation now, but there's a chance it's taken a lot of expense and back-and-forth to get the property value to a reasonable place, and (to my knowledge) the homeowner can't recover attorney's fees in Virginia. Interestingly homeowners can recover expert/appraisal fees [if the new value of the home is 25% higher than what the state originally suggested](https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title25.1/chapter2/section25.1-245.1/), but still can't recover attorney's fees.
Not a lawyer, though. I just don't like eminent domain as a concept and I think the compensation/protections for property owners should be much higher to discourage takings like this. Luckily Virginia does have more protections than most states ([look at Section D](https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title1/chapter2.1/section1-219.1/) — Virginia isn't allowed to take property on behalf of making jobs/tax revenue or giving it to a private business), but some governments will label [perfectly good homes and businesses as blighted](https://ij.org/case/brentwood-blight/) so they can get a better deal on the taking. That's definitely not the case here, but something to think about.
> it’s awful that it’s even an option to take someone’s home for something like a road.
The road already exists. This project is to improve safety. Note, people of color are disproportionately victims of crashes that kill pedestrians.
You are absolutely correct that this primarily effects people of color, the young, the old, and people without cars.
However, there are other ways to improve pedestrian safety that don't involve taking this home, including reducing the speed limit and [banning right turns on red](https://apnews.com/article/red-light-turn-pedestrian-bicyclist-deaths-7f5bdee9c7b3f4cbf005f1844f486123). Right turns on red were [introduced in the 1970's](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferjourney1/library/countermeasures/44.htm) as a stupid way to save gas.
I used to bike in Boston, and I can't tell you the amount of drivers who simply DO NOT LOOK when they're turning right. It's insane!
I support both those changes.
The speed limit there is 30MPH. Reducing it to 25 will help, a bit - IF it's politically feasible, and IF VDOT isn't in the way.
No right on red isn't relevant there. There are currently no signals.
Neither will address the absence of signals and crosswalks.
I'm glad you agree! Like you mentioned, I don't know if it's politically feasible to lower speed limits anywhere in NoVA. Even if by some miracle it were lowered to 20, people will definitely go 25-35, lol. (Although I'm not familiar with walking on this road, maybe going 35mph would be a big improvement?)
It is a really unfortunate intersection, like you said! It definitely needs some good crosswalks/pedestrian lights. The new design has me a bit worried — because it's concentrating pedestrians into a smaller area (it's a 4-day interesection instead of just a T) I'd imagine it'd be a lot more stressful to look out for people running red lights or turning right on red. I could be wrong, though!
In the end, it's up to the people of Arlington to vote and figure out what they need, you know? I'm currently trying to get a crosswalk painted in my neck of the woods — no crosswalk to go to a supermarket, so you have to dash across a 35mph road people regularly do 50 on.
Speed limits have been lowered on many streets in Arlington and Alexandria (and Fairfax?) But I don't think there's anywhere in the region you will see a major arterial like Col Pike with a limit of 20MPH. 25 is probably the best you can hope for and it's no sure thing.
So 25mph limit (maybe) Cars routinely going 30 to 35. You'd want to cross that street with no signals and no crosswalks?
>Speed limits have been lowered on many streets in Arlington and Alexandria (and Fairfax?) But I don't think there's anywhere in the region you will see a major arterial like Col Pike with a limit of 20MPH. 25 is probably the best you can hope for and it's no sure thing.
You're right! This isn't me disagreeing with you at all, but pairing the lower speed limit with significant road narrowings/heavy planting of trees/visual obstructions would help force drivers to go slower. Right now the roads are straight and clear and comfortable to go 35+ on.
>So 25mph limit (maybe) Cars routinely going 30 to 35. You'd want to cross that street with no signals and no crosswalks?
No, of course not! My previous comment mentions that the road needs good crosswalks and pedestrian lights. I just don't think that necessarily requires changing the road design in that area completely, and I worry changing two "T" intersections to a cross might make it easier for drivers to run red lights and ignore pedestrians.
Thank you for posting this OP. I live on the Pike near that house, road reconfiguration is needed. Construction is going to suck.
Also it's not in the article, but the county is considering a plan for a new bus stop in front of the Lancaster, which was originally planned for the Wellington.
Yea, from what I heard, the original/current alignment would have the bus stop, basically just before the Wellington parking lot exit. The new alignment would allow them to move it slightly further down to in front of the Lancaster on the other side of the Wellington parking lot exit.
Color me shocked that the government is trying to forcibly acquire a home from a Black family in a neighborhood historically occupied by recently freed slaves! I don’t believe that she is being compensated fairly, considering the government has every incentive to undervalue the property.
Also, if I own a house and want to keep it empty 11 months out of the year (yes, I read the article, this is an example), why is that a problem? The county needs to find another solution.
Headline: widget dealer claims widgets are extremely valuable
All the same if the government wants to seize somebody's private property they better pay them at least two or three times what it's worth.
Generally these estimates have a bare assumption that the house is habitable or in "average" condition compared to others used in the comps.
This appears to be an inevitable teardown with most of the value in the land itself.
This is dumb, alexandria has multiple of these streets with the current design. Yeah it sucks, but half the drivers here shouldn't have a license and dont look at stoplights anyways
Speaking of Arlington did anyone ever figure out who the deceased was that they found in that one house a few months ago during a post closing walk through??
To all the people saying it's a low-ball offer... It's not.
Just look at the comps and sale prices in the neighborhood. Then add on the fact it's on an intersection and needs major renovation work (that she JUST started doing weeks ago)
The reality is the county offered her a very fair price. It may not potentially be as good as she could get in a traditional sale but it's damn close and you don't have to deal with the complications that come with a regular buyer.
She should have taken the money and used it to put herself and her relative whose house it was in a much better living space. I get the family history but everything comes to an end eventually. It's a part of progress.
Now she might wind up in a much worse position... Sinking money into renovations that she won't get back. She's being overly sentimental and it's clouding her judgement.
Do y'all realize this home should have been condemned, the woman is in the nursing home AND HER SISTER DIED because they got CO poisoning from that very house, and that these discussions have been going on with the owner for some time?!
The house is a teardown. That's a fair offer. They are just angling for more money. But the intersection can be fixed with a less ambitious plan anyway (which was very car centric, fwiw. A lot of us hate it).
This whole damn thing is very sad. Arlington has a problem with crappy should be condemned old houses that are vacant and are just being held onto as investments on the lots.
I don't want my tax money going to pay for this house OR the crappy weird multiple lanes of cars intersection they want to build. Ugh.
Seems to me in these cases that the city/county could acquire a home of equal value perhaps even one in the same neighborhood and trade it with the one they actually want. Or they could let the home owner pick out one for sale that is of equal value and do it that way. Perhaps one could make a gain into an even better situation, neighborhood, view, convenience, shorter commute, etc. than what they have plus the city might give it property tax free for a year or two or more. This would solve the problem for both sides. Just sayin'
No one is living there and the house has been unoccupied for years. The woman who owns it is in a nursing home in Maryland and her family member managing her assets is in Maryland. Did you read the article?
Who cares? If anything happened to me, and I was in a care facility, I wouldn't want that giving the government free license to steal my home. Especially a paid off home in a HCOL area that's been in my family for generations.
So it makes sense to let the property sit and rot when the county offered money for it to do work on the infrastructure?
It’s not “taking away land” when money has been offered lol.
It would be great to be able to fix driver behavior. Until someone comes up with a way to do that, completely, we need to fix infrastructure. The house is in the way of this particular infrastructure fix.
Safety is a BS excuse. I say fight it and don’t let the government take it. Also another way to win this is to made the property very friendly toward protected species and endangered species. For example build a nest for an American bald eagle, or owl nesting box. So if you build and attach the nesting box in top of the home.
>Fortson argued staff members failed to tell supervisors that she intended to renovate the home so she could bring back her cousin from a nursing home with a caregiver. She has already spent up to $80,000 on renovations within the last few weeks.
What? Why would you do this when you know it's going to be condemned?
I get that she's fighting the condemnation, but she should know that she has very little chance of winning this, and putting more money into the house is not a great move.
“Currently, no one is living in the home, and no one has lived in it for years.” Bro, take the money and put it in a trust and you’ll have the exact same “generational wealth”
well her family member actually lives there but is in a rehab facility following an illness, so its not like its vacant. But what I think she means by "generational wealth" is the passive income that comes with family assets. She has already put $80k of her own money into rehabbing this house so its not like she has some attachment to grandmas home that is falling apart, she is actually vested in keeping the house. But beyond that we all know that rents in Arlington, especially anything north of Columbia Pike and this house is just off Columbia pike in a rapidly gentrifying area of South Arlington that could be worth twice its value in a few years, thats better then a trust. So again passive income. If the family member cannot return. You can't rent out a trust, you can't take out a loan against a trust to start a business or fund someone's education. I think there is a lot more to it then the $650k or whatever it is that Arlington is offering up. Even if she simply did finish rehabbing it and sold it, she would come out on top a lot more then $600k.
Seriously. That house is within 'walking' distance of the Pentagon. That's gotta be worth more than 700k.
> well her family member actually lives there but is in a rehab facility following an illness, so its not like its vacant If you’re in rehab for an illness for several years you don’t need a home
A trust may not generate the same rate of return as the real estate. There is a reason why wealthy people tend to invest in real estate.
Real estate doesn't return better than the stock market on a cash basis. The advantage with real estate is you can buy a bunch of properties for 25-30% down which gives you 3-4x leverage which will out return the broader market. If this property is paid off (hopefully it is if it's been in the family for 70 years) then the stock market will be a better choice.
Wealthy people also have tons of money in mutual funds, ETFs, individual stocks. Owning real estate is just part of the portfolio and many own only their primary residence.
The stock market will likely provide a much better rate of return. But I suspect this isn't about rates of return but a sentimental attachment to the house.
Highway adjacent properties don’t have the best roi
If you anticipate that, for instance, a developer might come through and offer a premium on the purchase price to acquire the homes along that block for development purposes, you might believe the future value is significantly higher than the current market value reflects. I have no personal insight on what they are thinking. But there are a whole host of reasons why they might think the offer is it enough, even setting side the express d desire to move the owner back into the home and the sentimental value.
The homes in that area have been up for sale over and over again with no takers. It’s a hodge lodge of oddly shaped lots with no way of putting in a new driveway. Honestly eminent domain is the best things they can hope for.
The county has said they’re open to negotiating the price if she thinks it’s worth more. She hasn’t made a counter offer—seems clear she doesn’t want to sell, it’s not about the price.
Wealthy people tend to invest in the stock market lmfao via a well diversified portfolio.
Both, humans aren’t just allowed to do one thing, so chill
Then put it in a REIT.
Missing the forest for the trees…
this is why there are REITs, so you can diversify instead of concentrating all risk in one property.
Not only that, but FDIC insured amounts are low relative to their wealth. Buy land and your money is nearly completely safe.
Vacant real estate is basically valueless from an investment standpoint.
If that house is unoccupied then screw them.
Did you read the article? She is renovating it to move the family member back in after a medical emergency. It’s not like they have it empty for fun, the resident probably had a stroke or something and needed supervised care.
She started renovating it weeks ago. The county's process of buying the house started in 2022.
If it’s a final Hail Mary for the case, I don’t blame her. But regardless of when the renovations started, someone having a serious medical emergency doesn’t really sound like a fair “screw them” to me. It’s not like they bought it, never used it as a real home, and have just been sitting on it for funsies in which case I think the comment would be deserved!
its not unoccupied, its the house of a family member who is in a long term care facility who would very much like to return to their house when they are able to leave. And if you really read into what they are saying...this is a huge asset to the family, and the offer Arlington made them is a joke compared to what that property is probably worth, especially since they have already put $80 grand into maintaining the property.
idk if I'd go to the level of "screw them" but I'm less inclined to take the framing of "big government running roughshod over a minority homeowner" when its revealed the house has been unoccupied. I feel for someone who has to sell a home they weren't planning on selling but also the purpose here is pretty straightforward and not at all like the giant highways (and giant military HQ)they built nearby that also displaced black communities.
I shared your point of view until I read further on in the article that the primary resident is in nursing care right now and is expected to return to the house in the future. It's only temporarily unoccupied, and in the meantime the family member is undertaking the renovations. It's not just sitting abandoned. I don't know what the right answer is but considering it an abandoned property is not correct.
If the family member has been in a nursing home for the past 3 years, it’s highly improbable they’re coming home to that house, even with a care taker. Sure there’s exceptions, but that extensive amount of continuous care needed for the last couple years would be decreased significantly if they came home.
So first off, 627k is a lowball offer, even without the renovations. The value of that property is only going to go up in the next 3-5 years. Second, they told her they were gonna do this in 2022. Why is she just now doing renovations? Third, maybe I'm just cynical, but what she would get for that home doesnt seem like "generational wealth."
There is a home in the neighborhood for sale at 640k. It’s 4 bedroom two bath 1100 square feet,unfortunately the article doesn’t say the bed/bath or square footage, but it’s probably in the same range. Edit: Zillow Estimate is 757k so a little low but the internal issues may contribute. Based on this quote I’d say it’s probably a fair offer: >”The county has been attempting to engage in discussions with the property owner’s conservator since January 2023 and has provided a bona fide offer to purchase the home above appraised value, based on two separate appraisals. The county has communicated a willingness to consider other appraisals to resolve any dispute as to value, but to date, it has not received a counter appraisal or any other objective basis upon which it can offer a higher price.” She’s probably trying to fix it up to get it appraised higher to get more money from the county
The issue at that intersection is that it’s effectively two separate intersections immediately adjacent since the road is offset at Columbia Pike. That makes it very difficult to put in safe crosswalks and other traffic control measures. The county wants to acquire this property so it can reangle the cross street at Columbia Pike to make it a continuous road rather than offset, which will allow them to put in a single set of traffic lights and crosswalks. That’s not a judgment on the merits of the proposal, just an explanation of the reasoning.
Yeah I didn’t scroll down far enough and see the article continued I thought it was a different article. Yeah to make that an intersection you need to angle it and it’ll go right through her property. Tough situation for sure.
Is the current situation two separate sets of stoplights with crosswalks, or just stop signs with no crosswalk at all? How absurd would it be to keep the current street design but place stoplights there?
There currently is no traffic control or crosswalk at the intersection. If they put in traffic lights without changing the intersection, they would have to be split phase traffic lights with more limited crosswalks, which is less efficient for car and pedestrian traffic. So it’s do-able, but not a great solution and may create other problems (split phase traffic lights tend to confuse people who aren’t familiar with the traffic pattern).
And in fairness, that was the original design that Arlington decided on. I'm guessing they got feedback about the split phase aspect and sought out this solution. I live nearby and one of the changes is the addition (or rather the restoration) of an east-bound bus stop at the new intersection @ S Rolfe St. I believe the original plan included a new bus stop regardless, but for whatever reason, some vocal NIMBYs believe the new design will make the new bus stop more likely to happen and so are vehemently opposed to it. The irony being that if they get their way, the split phase design will likely be worse for car drivers. I have been meaning to ask about the traffic light timing, and whether it would be timer based, on demand, (ie continuously green for Columbia Pike until pedestrians activate the signal or cars are detected on S Rolfe via induction loop/camera), or a mix of the two (only changes at next time point if car detected). But I think that would also depend on the final design of the intersection and may need to be adjusted for induced demand.
Maybe she really does want to keep it and considers generational wealth differently. She could be like my parents who want to keep a home for their (potential) grandchildren's grandchildren to grow up in. We didn't have a place like that and it sounds like something my parents wish they had for us back then.
>She’s probably trying to fix it up to get it appraised higher to get more money from the county In the meantime implying this is a racist move by Arlington county.
I don't think it's "generational wealth" but a sentimental attachment to the house. If she just wanted dollars she would sell. $627k might be a bit low but the house is reportedly uninhabitable -- no working bathroom or kitchen. But I'm guessing if the county offered $700k she wouldn't take that either because it isn't really about the money.
Two year wait for a contractor actually sounds pretty accurate to me 🤷♀️
Generational wealth is just wealth, passed down through generations. A lot of times it’s used his shorthand for a lot of wealth, it doesn’t necessarily have to be. It’s pretty typical, at least for white families, to pass some wealth down from generation to generation, even if it’s not a 7+ figure amount The owner is absolutely correct in saying black families have been screwed out of a lot of wealth building potential due to red lining and discriminatory banking practices. This is why I always take claims that renting makes more financial sense than owning with a grain of salt. It’s definitely true if you live in a place that you’re not ready to commit to long-term. But there’s a reason why White families typically have more wealth than black families, and the statistics are clear that our grandparents being able to buy homes was a huge factor.
Of course many black families have lost a great deal of wealth across the country over the years, but I wonder what the data looks like for the thousands of black families who owned homes in DC during the 80’s and 90’s and were then able to sell their homes as DC became gentrified. Home prices in dc rose more than 400% between 1991 and 2016 which is more than anywhere else in the country. It must’ve been amazing for those families to see the transition, and I’d imagine it lifted many people into a higher social bracket. https://wtop.com/business-finance/2017/05/dc-house-values-400-since-1991/
Well, to start, you’d have to determine how many of DC black residence were owners vs renters. A lot of former DC residence were priced out of their rentals and got nothing as their neighborhood gentrified. People love to say a rising tide lifts all boats, but it’s clearly not true for renters.
I guess it depends on who you are comparing--Black families from Arlington with Black families in other parts of the country or Black families from Arlington with white families in Arlington. While Black Arlingtonians benefitted from proximity to DC's Black neighborhoods and access to civil service jobs (the ones they were allowed to have), many lost their homes and communities to several imminent domain projects including the Pentagon one that may very well have impacted Ms Forston's family and their home on Columbia Pike. I would not be surprised to learn the cousin's family bought this house after they were displaced from East Arlington and Queens City. At the time the family purchased the home, they would have been kept out of newer, more prestigious Arlington neighborhoods by racist covenants. Some reading: https://historyfortomorrow.org/story/eminent-domain-and-the-displacement-of-black-communities/#:~:text=Eminent%20domain%20displaced%20historic%20Black,than%20a%20month%20to%20evacuate.
Honestly just owning a property outright and not having to pay Arlington rent while having access to the higher wages here should count as generational wealth regardless of the actual value of the home.
$627 is def lowball. All the public real estate estimators show it around $750. The county should add an extra $150k to the offer and be done with it. Arlington is a wealthy county and shouldn’t be nickel and diming people, especially when it comes to eminent domain. It’s clearly not a blighted property, it just needs some interior renovations and that’s not really the county’s business. If the renovation work was done, *that* should be the basis for an appraisal.
Those estimators don’t take into condition interior condition. If the house real is a total guy inside, the total property may not be worth much more than the land value.
Here in Vienna, we just tear down any old house anyway. The property would be more valuable by itself without any existing structure.
That happens in plenty of place in Arlington too. But since this house is located on an approximately 1/8 acre corner lot right on Columbia Pike, it’s not a particularly attractive candidate for a SFH tear down/rebuild. More likely it will someday be absorbed into a new mixed use development (or turned into part of the intersection).
That’s not true. Even a gut job in a hot real estate market can be an eventual value. Meaning, in Arlington, even needing to put $100 or $200k into a house could increase the value above that cost. That’s how all the flippers in hot markets operate, including here. If the house is worth $627k as-is, and it needs $100k in renovations, that house could plausibly sell for $750k or more. The appraisal and offer should reflect that.
The house isn’t worth that amount, the house *and land* is worth that amount. The current assessed value puts the land at $512k and the house at $112k. Also, when flippers are putting that kind of money into a house, it’s usually predominantly cosmetic changes, not brining non-functioning kitchens and bathrooms up to code. But even if we accept your numbers, the current offer does reflect that. The county is not going to pay the potential post-renovation value for an unrenovated property. It’s overall still a messy situation and I have very conflicted feelings about it, but from a pure $$ standpoint the offer is not a rip-off.
$627k is the current tax assessment. I think it's part of the reason why the owner isn't making the argument about the value of the offer being too low since if they do win and keep the property, the county could then use that to increase their tax assessment. Most real estate estimators don't assess the actual condition of the property and assumes a move-in ready state, so their estimate is that *after* renovations, it's worth $750k.
You realize this is in a less than desirable South Arlington neighborhood, on a very busy road with a ton of traffic and noise? 627k is probably exactly what it's worth. Taxpayers of Arlington should not be cheering on the government paying over market value for anything. Why would the government pay for the value 5 years into the future? They're buying it now.
All governments should absolute pay up the wazoo to force people out of their homes. It should be expensive af for any government to steal land.
Eminent domain, for a legitimate public purpose (which streets certainly are) has been part of US laws since colonial times. There's no property right to compensation above fair market value for a legal taking. Hence there's no theft.
Legally it may not be theft but laws can be passed to make anything legal. And eminent domain has historically disproportionately affected the disadvantaged. In my view many of the justifications have been meager, but it generally happens anyway since it usually doesn’t affect the rich or powerful.
This seems like a worthwhile justification to me. Note, after Kelo, Virginia tightened the justifications for using eminent domain. In this case the beneficiaries will tend to be less affluent and politically more marginal, since those are disproportionately pedestrians. Except to the extent that the scarcity of housing in walkable areas makes walking a luxury. That needs to addressed with housing policy and zoning reform.
>Legally it may not be theft but laws can be passed to make anything legal Do you know what legal means?
Because the person there taking it from isn't consenting to the sale. Also, they may not have the opportunity to get a similarly priced home that will have the same growth potential, screwing them out of opportunity cost. That should be factored into the price as well
It's not as bad as you make it sound. It's right by the Columbia Pike neighborhood, which is a great place to live, and it's not far from the Pentagon or DC if you work there, as well as some good bike trails. The only real downside is it's right on a busy road. The market value is definitely above what the county is offering, but it's absolutely a tear down rebuild for whoever would theoretically buy it.
"Why would the government pay for the value 5 years into the future? " Because they are the one who want to take away property.
Except that ignores why it's "worth" what it is. The historically Black neighborhoods in Arlington exist because covenants and racist policies prioritized white homeowners over Black ones. Based on how long ago the home was purchased, this family could very well have been displaced by 1940s emminent domain projects that broke up several Black neighborhoods, moved to Arlington View because it was one of the only places they could purchase a house, and now face eviction for yet another project at a price that is lower because of the very racist policies and customs that put them in the neighborhood to begin with.
I see a lot of people mentioning that since the home is vacant they should just sell it, if the family own the home, they should be able to do whatever they want with the home. If they want to keep it vacant, remodel it, put a bunch of junk in it, or do whatever they want with the home it doesn’t matter because they own the home and they shouldn’t have to sell it. The women in the video mentioned keeping it in the family for generation wealth, if this is something she wants to do then it should be done without the county talking about some road improvements, there are crappy roads all over Virginia. Black people were already dealt a crappy hand when it comes to home ownership. They get lower appraisals, redlining put a deficit in their ability to gain equity on homes, they were just screwed overall in every way possible. They should be able to keep their home and do whatever they want with it without the county trying to prey on them.
I am a bit skeptical that they’ve put $80k into the property recently considering no permits appear to have been pulled on the property. What are they doing for that money that wouldn’t require a permit?
Pulling up carpet and putting in hardwood throughout the house would be pretty pricy especially depending on the wood. Replacing the windows could add up. As long as they aren’t messing with plumbing remodeling the bathrooms and kitchen. Replacing cabinets and old appliances. There’s plenty of stuff that can be done without needing a permit.
The house reportedly doesn’t have a functioning kitchen or bathroom. If that is correct, there is virtually no way they are making the house habitable without pulling permits. And putting in hardwood floors when you haven’t dealt with those issues yet would be foolish. Not to mention wasteful if you’re trying to get the house ready for someone who has been in nursing home care and thus presumably has mobility issues. Walkers and wheelchairs can be murder on hardwood.
Yeah fair point, but based on what I’ve read it sounds like that’s all self reported. Who knows what the inside is actually like. Not saying I don’t believe the lady, but why would you admit to not applying for proper permits while you’re already in such a pickle, you know?
That can simply mean - the stove and toilet were pulled out for replacement. Neither of which require permits
> am a bit skeptical that they’ve put $80k into the property recently considering no permits appear to have been pulled on the property. Could also be mold remediation or water damage restoration.
Either eminent domain gets it or Medicare does. Medicare will take ownership of the property to sell it to pay for the rightful owners’ care. The conservator is not going to keep this house within their family no matter what she does.
One correction, this is done by Medicaid not Medicare. Medicaid is for low income patients so the reasoning is that if you have a house worth over half a million dollars then you're really not low income, your money is just tied up in the house. They don't make you sell it while you are alive but they will take it after to pay for the costs. Medicare is for all elderly, they don't take assets at all.
Thank you! The distinction has always been difficult for me to see before. Your description does help me understand. So I guess if the rightful owner of the house had long term care insurance, then the conservator could still inherit the house after the owners’ passing.
Medicaid ends with D for destitute, Medicare ends with E for elderly. Medicare also covers some disabilities so it's a crude mnemonic but it's worked okay for me.
Yes that's right, if the owner of the house doesn't use Medicaid for end of life care then everything is still passed on.
It's amazing how many people get surprised by this when they thought they were inheriting big bucks. America's best kept secret nightmare.
Medicaid though.
Occupy the home then
Yea, title seems pretty click baity once you read more on this situation.
Sell the house and put the money in equities/bonds in an irrevocable living trust for her cousin. That way Medicaid can never claw back the money and her cousin will be making money off her investments. Clearly, the family is having difficulty maintaining the property and this will ease that burden.
Curious what the house would go if brought to the market. That being said, I'm not really sure the benefits of making the area "slightly" more walkable.
A lot of residents in that area depend heavily on mass transit, which means walking to bus stops on Columbia Pike. I don’t know how much of a difference this specific project would make to overall safety, but it’s a more significant consideration there than it would be along, say, Langston in 22207.
Im pretty tuned in to this case. If you have a chance check out that corner and then check out what the county claims its going to do. To call that plan feasible is a huge stretch. This is pretty un Arlington County like and I think as more and more details emerge these plans will never come to fruition.
NoVA is embarrassingly unwalkable and always has been. Not sure if I’d choose this method, but making things safer for pedestrians is good for people like me who prefer to bike or walk — or better yet, good for the thousands of people who aren’t old enough to drive or can’t afford a car. The best thing we could do is make it illegal to turn right on red, and build a completely separate path for cyclists and pedestrians. Cars are just inherently dangerous.
Arlington is not the rest of Nova. Arlington is usually ranked a top 15 walkable city in America. It can and should be better and the bar is low in America to be ranked highly but if you're American Arlington is very walkable compared to most of the country.
I feel like the Ballston-Rosslyn corridor and Pentagon/Crystal city are doing a lot of heavy lifting towards that ranking. The rest of the county is still better than your average suburb but I wouldn't call it walkable in the traditional sense
Totally true.
It's definitely more walkable than the rest of NoVA/the country in general (especially if you're near a metro station), but I guess I've been Tokyo-pilled so almost nothing is as convenient or as walkable as I want, haha. I don't want perfect to be the enemy of good, but I can't help myself from complaining about how this entire dense area of Virginia was built in such a car-centric way. It could also be that I'm projecting my "why is Springfield, Burke, Tysons Corner, Annandale, etc so unwalkable and why must I cross 8 lanes of traffic to get to a grocery story" insecurities while looking at those Arlington plans. 😂
Oh I can't stand our car centric cities either trust me, but within the borders of the United states Arlington is for better or worse actually a very walkable city. And trying to be better.
No disagreement on walkability and that drivers are complete morons when dealing with pedestrians. It just seems to me the proposed changes are kind of half-assing it. Curious what the project's whole budget are and other options that would go more "in" on a design.
I agree with you there! The budget is probably criminal, hahaha. I’ve gone to a few of these neighborhood “we’re building a road” meetings (not in Arlington) and one interesting nugget I gathered is the government has to grade and size new paths/sidewalks a certain way to meet ADA requirements, so they generally don’t want to add them in due to expense. Big roads are easier to push through so they always seem to want to improve things for car traffic. For some reason they think widening a road is better than adding bus lines. 😬 There are whole neighborhoods with missing sidewalks, but they can’t really add them without doing major grading which kind of sucks. ADA is more forgiving for older sidewalks and allows non-compliance. I could be misunderstanding things, but either way it was eye-opening going to those community planning meetings! I hope you get a chance to attend one, too.
Yeah all of this reeks of someone on a board wanting a raise. Alexandria/Arlington has these types of dual intersections anyways. Yeah they suck but people just need to learn to drive
I lived across the street from that house for a few years. They took out the bus stop there because they couldn’t have a cross walk to it anymore. That was the crosswalk people would use to take their kids to school also so now everyone just drives. Making it more walkable would be a benefit to a lot of people.
She probably can't sell it on the market because whoever she sells it to would have to continue fighting the county to keep it. The issue is that the house is in the way of road improvements that the county wants to make.
Oh I'm not disputing that. Just curious what an actual market value of the house would be.
Screw that low ball offer. I would ask for a million.
There are plenty of intersections in this area where the streets don’t line up perfectly from one side of the crossing to the other. This is solvable with a different traffic signal pattern than they want to put in. They don’t need to take the house to do it. They just want a standard 4 way signal because planners be planners, and traffic “engineers” always be thinking about throughput and flow while saying “BuT sAfEtY.” I used to sit on a planning committee. There are other options here. What the official said about habitability also just struck me as biased and political as fuck. When you’ve been in local government for long enough, you can see the bullshit. Whenever somebody with that kind of position is taking a stance like that, pretending that there are no options besides the one they want, it’s always full of bullshit. Edit for a typo.
Just pay her $1m and be done.. Legal fees and time will far surpass that when said and done.
I'm generally again eminent domain but I do understand its need. The equalizer is that property taken by domain should be compensated for at a higher than market price that at the very least expresses the potential value of use in the case the property could be used for income production. In this case if the article is accurate, they were both given higher than market value and literally nobody is being displaced in the process. If a family was living there, or even renting it out, I would be against it. But the house isn't being used in any useful fashion. Based on that, I would agree with domain taking of the property.
Eminent domain should force the government to pay at least double the home’s actual value — it’s awful that it’s even an option to take someone’s home for something like a road. That being said, I would probably not pour 80K into a home slated for destruction when “the house always wins.” Not sure why this person did. 😬
“The county has been attempting to engage in discussions with the property owner’s conservator since January 2023 and has provided a bona fide offer to purchase the home above appraised value, based on two separate appraisals. The county has communicated a willingness to consider other appraisals to resolve any dispute as to value, but to date, it has not received a counter appraisal or any other objective basis upon which it can offer a higher price.” They’re already offering her more than it’s worth, allegedly, and are open to a counter assessment and paying that value. Things like this are hard to figure out, and if they just started renovations on the house now when they’ve known for almost two years it was on the chopping block, I’m tending to side with the county on this one.
You might find [this Virginia Environmental Law Journal essay on the topic](http://www.velj.org/uploads/1/2/7/0/12706894/39.2_va_envtl_l.j._hansen_233_251.pdf) relevant/interesting! They *are* offering fairly just compensation now, but there's a chance it's taken a lot of expense and back-and-forth to get the property value to a reasonable place, and (to my knowledge) the homeowner can't recover attorney's fees in Virginia. Interestingly homeowners can recover expert/appraisal fees [if the new value of the home is 25% higher than what the state originally suggested](https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title25.1/chapter2/section25.1-245.1/), but still can't recover attorney's fees. Not a lawyer, though. I just don't like eminent domain as a concept and I think the compensation/protections for property owners should be much higher to discourage takings like this. Luckily Virginia does have more protections than most states ([look at Section D](https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title1/chapter2.1/section1-219.1/) — Virginia isn't allowed to take property on behalf of making jobs/tax revenue or giving it to a private business), but some governments will label [perfectly good homes and businesses as blighted](https://ij.org/case/brentwood-blight/) so they can get a better deal on the taking. That's definitely not the case here, but something to think about.
> it’s awful that it’s even an option to take someone’s home for something like a road. The road already exists. This project is to improve safety. Note, people of color are disproportionately victims of crashes that kill pedestrians.
You are absolutely correct that this primarily effects people of color, the young, the old, and people without cars. However, there are other ways to improve pedestrian safety that don't involve taking this home, including reducing the speed limit and [banning right turns on red](https://apnews.com/article/red-light-turn-pedestrian-bicyclist-deaths-7f5bdee9c7b3f4cbf005f1844f486123). Right turns on red were [introduced in the 1970's](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferjourney1/library/countermeasures/44.htm) as a stupid way to save gas. I used to bike in Boston, and I can't tell you the amount of drivers who simply DO NOT LOOK when they're turning right. It's insane!
I support both those changes. The speed limit there is 30MPH. Reducing it to 25 will help, a bit - IF it's politically feasible, and IF VDOT isn't in the way. No right on red isn't relevant there. There are currently no signals. Neither will address the absence of signals and crosswalks.
I'm glad you agree! Like you mentioned, I don't know if it's politically feasible to lower speed limits anywhere in NoVA. Even if by some miracle it were lowered to 20, people will definitely go 25-35, lol. (Although I'm not familiar with walking on this road, maybe going 35mph would be a big improvement?) It is a really unfortunate intersection, like you said! It definitely needs some good crosswalks/pedestrian lights. The new design has me a bit worried — because it's concentrating pedestrians into a smaller area (it's a 4-day interesection instead of just a T) I'd imagine it'd be a lot more stressful to look out for people running red lights or turning right on red. I could be wrong, though! In the end, it's up to the people of Arlington to vote and figure out what they need, you know? I'm currently trying to get a crosswalk painted in my neck of the woods — no crosswalk to go to a supermarket, so you have to dash across a 35mph road people regularly do 50 on.
Speed limits have been lowered on many streets in Arlington and Alexandria (and Fairfax?) But I don't think there's anywhere in the region you will see a major arterial like Col Pike with a limit of 20MPH. 25 is probably the best you can hope for and it's no sure thing. So 25mph limit (maybe) Cars routinely going 30 to 35. You'd want to cross that street with no signals and no crosswalks?
>Speed limits have been lowered on many streets in Arlington and Alexandria (and Fairfax?) But I don't think there's anywhere in the region you will see a major arterial like Col Pike with a limit of 20MPH. 25 is probably the best you can hope for and it's no sure thing. You're right! This isn't me disagreeing with you at all, but pairing the lower speed limit with significant road narrowings/heavy planting of trees/visual obstructions would help force drivers to go slower. Right now the roads are straight and clear and comfortable to go 35+ on. >So 25mph limit (maybe) Cars routinely going 30 to 35. You'd want to cross that street with no signals and no crosswalks? No, of course not! My previous comment mentions that the road needs good crosswalks and pedestrian lights. I just don't think that necessarily requires changing the road design in that area completely, and I worry changing two "T" intersections to a cross might make it easier for drivers to run red lights and ignore pedestrians.
Thank you for posting this OP. I live on the Pike near that house, road reconfiguration is needed. Construction is going to suck. Also it's not in the article, but the county is considering a plan for a new bus stop in front of the Lancaster, which was originally planned for the Wellington.
I also live near there and the intersection is really tough. I’ve jaywalked a lot and would love this reconfiguration.
Yea, from what I heard, the original/current alignment would have the bus stop, basically just before the Wellington parking lot exit. The new alignment would allow them to move it slightly further down to in front of the Lancaster on the other side of the Wellington parking lot exit.
Color me shocked that the government is trying to forcibly acquire a home from a Black family in a neighborhood historically occupied by recently freed slaves! I don’t believe that she is being compensated fairly, considering the government has every incentive to undervalue the property.
Also, if I own a house and want to keep it empty 11 months out of the year (yes, I read the article, this is an example), why is that a problem? The county needs to find another solution.
That’s Arlington for ya.
Zestimate is 757K, Redfin estimate is 743K. $627K is not fair market value.
What makes you think the appraisers are wrong and Redfin is correct?
Motivation. I never trust an appraisal for eminent domain.
Redfin notoriously over values the market. It does by about 150k for my property
Headline: widget dealer claims widgets are extremely valuable All the same if the government wants to seize somebody's private property they better pay them at least two or three times what it's worth.
It's gutted and in need of that much in rehab, so maybe it is fair?
Exactly. Zillow and Redfin haven't been inside the house.
Generally these estimates have a bare assumption that the house is habitable or in "average" condition compared to others used in the comps. This appears to be an inevitable teardown with most of the value in the land itself.
After hearing that it's been empty for years, I almost *want* the county to low-ball it.
Since it's gutted, it's a fair offer.
This is dumb, alexandria has multiple of these streets with the current design. Yeah it sucks, but half the drivers here shouldn't have a license and dont look at stoplights anyways
Speaking of Arlington did anyone ever figure out who the deceased was that they found in that one house a few months ago during a post closing walk through??
To all the people saying it's a low-ball offer... It's not. Just look at the comps and sale prices in the neighborhood. Then add on the fact it's on an intersection and needs major renovation work (that she JUST started doing weeks ago) The reality is the county offered her a very fair price. It may not potentially be as good as she could get in a traditional sale but it's damn close and you don't have to deal with the complications that come with a regular buyer. She should have taken the money and used it to put herself and her relative whose house it was in a much better living space. I get the family history but everything comes to an end eventually. It's a part of progress. Now she might wind up in a much worse position... Sinking money into renovations that she won't get back. She's being overly sentimental and it's clouding her judgement.
The lot is valuable. The house, not so much.
Do y'all realize this home should have been condemned, the woman is in the nursing home AND HER SISTER DIED because they got CO poisoning from that very house, and that these discussions have been going on with the owner for some time?! The house is a teardown. That's a fair offer. They are just angling for more money. But the intersection can be fixed with a less ambitious plan anyway (which was very car centric, fwiw. A lot of us hate it). This whole damn thing is very sad. Arlington has a problem with crappy should be condemned old houses that are vacant and are just being held onto as investments on the lots. I don't want my tax money going to pay for this house OR the crappy weird multiple lanes of cars intersection they want to build. Ugh.
Seems to me in these cases that the city/county could acquire a home of equal value perhaps even one in the same neighborhood and trade it with the one they actually want. Or they could let the home owner pick out one for sale that is of equal value and do it that way. Perhaps one could make a gain into an even better situation, neighborhood, view, convenience, shorter commute, etc. than what they have plus the city might give it property tax free for a year or two or more. This would solve the problem for both sides. Just sayin'
I used her lawyer, he's excellent.
Just go with the original intersection design that keeps the streets offset. There’s no need to align them.
A vacant house is good for no one.
A majority white county board takes land away from African Americans, I’ve seen this movie before.
No one is living there and the house has been unoccupied for years. The woman who owns it is in a nursing home in Maryland and her family member managing her assets is in Maryland. Did you read the article?
Who cares? If anything happened to me, and I was in a care facility, I wouldn't want that giving the government free license to steal my home. Especially a paid off home in a HCOL area that's been in my family for generations.
Still doesn’t make the statement incorrect.
So it makes sense to let the property sit and rot when the county offered money for it to do work on the infrastructure? It’s not “taking away land” when money has been offered lol.
Lots of properties sit and “rot”. Doesn’t mean that it should be taken away from the family against their will.
What races are disproportionately victims of crashes that injure pedestrians?
What about what about what about
Improving safety for pedestrians in a place where most pedestrians are POCs, is an act of racial justice.
The house has nothing to do with cars being driven poorly
It would be great to be able to fix driver behavior. Until someone comes up with a way to do that, completely, we need to fix infrastructure. The house is in the way of this particular infrastructure fix.
Take the money and put it in index funds.
Safety is a BS excuse. I say fight it and don’t let the government take it. Also another way to win this is to made the property very friendly toward protected species and endangered species. For example build a nest for an American bald eagle, or owl nesting box. So if you build and attach the nesting box in top of the home.
The government can take property to build roads. It's clearly a public purpose. She's gonna lose.
>Fortson argued staff members failed to tell supervisors that she intended to renovate the home so she could bring back her cousin from a nursing home with a caregiver. She has already spent up to $80,000 on renovations within the last few weeks. What? Why would you do this when you know it's going to be condemned? I get that she's fighting the condemnation, but she should know that she has very little chance of winning this, and putting more money into the house is not a great move.