Missing Middle travesty in Arlington

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

Literally why 90% of people live in 22207 and 22213.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about if people get to live in nice neighorhoods when they can afford to?

Much more fun to complain about how unfair life is and paint yourself as the victim.

Watch the libs continue their crusade against the nuclear family. How do you think it will turn out?

Go F yourself, RWNJ. Arlington doesn’t want trash like you.

Hey, everybody, here’s your classy new YIMBY neighbor! I bet that you can’t wait to have an entire neighborhood full of them! The living experience is going to so pleasant. They seem really approachable.

I’m in the nice neighborhood you can’t afford.

GTFO, trash.

Obviously you can barely afford it, or you wouldn't be so mad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

Again, do you speak for affluent POC? Are you their white savior?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

Again, do you speak for affluent POC? Are you their white savior?

I am not speaking for anyone else and I have never heard the term "white savior" used in relation to an affluent person. Do you have any idea what you are talking about or are you just mad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

The unspoken truth that everyone knows but no one will say is that “nice” areas are desirable because poor people can’t afford to live there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about if people get to live in nice neighorhoods when they can afford to?

Much more fun to complain about how unfair life is and paint yourself as the victim.

Watch the libs continue their crusade against the nuclear family. How do you think it will turn out?

Go F yourself, RWNJ. Arlington doesn’t want trash like you.

Hey, everybody, here’s your classy new YIMBY neighbor! I bet that you can’t wait to have an entire neighborhood full of them! The living experience is going to so pleasant. They seem really approachable.

I’m in the nice neighborhood you can’t afford.

GTFO, trash.

Obviously you can barely afford it, or you wouldn't be so mad.

I simply hate RWNJ trash. GTFO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

Oh darn. RWNJ bro was priced out of Arlington. Such a shame.

The largest SFH lots in Arlington are 10,000 ish SF. Please share what lot of that size would support a high rise or a paper mill. You are making a false equivalency.

^meant to add "+1" to the above post.

You can combine lots. This is a tangential hand waiving comment. A 6+ story single stair apartment building can easily be built on a sub 10,000 sq ft (formerly SF lot) if the zoning rules allow it, this is not hyperbole. There are floor plans for apartment buildings that are 25 feet wide and 70 feet long, with 6+ stories. VA is evaluating about single stair reform this year and that is next step for YIMBYs to force density into suburban neighborhoods. People need to fight back. They don’t care if people die in fires they just hate single family homes.

There are height restrictions, moron.

Arlington county will relax these too, just watch. It’s only a matter of time before “middle housing” turns into 6 story apartments buildings in single family neighborhoods.

No, they don’t.

Hysterical RWNJs making up lies in an election year.

Go f yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about if people get to live in nice neighorhoods when they can afford to?

Much more fun to complain about how unfair life is and paint yourself as the victim.

Watch the libs continue their crusade against the nuclear family. How do you think it will turn out?

Go F yourself, RWNJ. Arlington doesn’t want trash like you.

Hey, everybody, here’s your classy new YIMBY neighbor! I bet that you can’t wait to have an entire neighborhood full of them! The living experience is going to so pleasant. They seem really approachable.

I’m in the nice neighborhood you can’t afford.

GTFO, trash.

Oh wow, you got me there. This is very believable and I’m sure is true.
Soooo edgy. Watch out, he’s going to cut himself with the Ezra Klein book!

Lmao.

Why are the YIMBYs such angry little boys?

Sorry, loser. You were priced out by a woman.

GTFO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

NIMBYS are racist fcks? Shocker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

It’s a free country. If you’re so bothered by “segregated” schools you should enroll your kids in a school where they are a minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

It’s a free country. If you’re so bothered by “segregated” schools you should enroll your kids in a school where they are a minority.

If you're so bothered by density you should move to the boonies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

It’s a free country. If you’re so bothered by “segregated” schools you should enroll your kids in a school where they are a minority.

If you're so bothered by density you should move to the boonies.

Perfect! I’m not bothered by density. I’m bothered when my boonies become zoned for density. Which is what you are fighting for.

So when are going to make that move so you can live out your principles and have your kids enrolled in an underperforming school district? Surely if you were serious about fighting “segregation” you would not be in 22207?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

It’s a free country. If you’re so bothered by “segregated” schools you should enroll your kids in a school where they are a minority.

If you're so bothered by density you should move to the boonies.

Perfect! I’m not bothered by density. I’m bothered when my boonies become zoned for density. Which is what you are fighting for.

So when are going to make that move so you can live out your principles and have your kids enrolled in an underperforming school district? Surely if you were serious about fighting “segregation” you would not be in 22207?

22207 is not the boonies and this is an issue that needs to be addressed by policy, not individual citizens. It's seriously like talking to a bunch of 5 year olds on this board sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an extreme NIMBY, I do understand that people must live somewhere. So I generally agree with progressive/smart growth strategy of population density along public transportation corridors, with the caveat existing SFH zoning should be preserved. There are plenty of other places served by public transportation that could redeveloped over existing SFH places like Arlington. We all know what is going on here, it’s a misguided attempt at equity nonsense.

How is letting people decide what to do with their own property “equity nonsense”? and sorry to break it to you, but all of Arlington is a transportation corridor.

+100

Based on your logic, all of Arlington should be made high density given its proximity to DC/Pentagon and Fairfax can maintain its existing SFH places. Curious to know how old you are, bc I’m guessing over 55 - or how much you paid for your house.

I am 40, I left Arlington when I saw the writing on the wall.

Zoning laws exist for a reason, I am not allowed to start a paper mill or erect a high rise apartment on my property due to the negative externalities it would impose on the community that does not have the infrastructure in place to support it.

We all know that these efforts are due to white liberals misguided attempts to make existing communities more “diverse” by artificially importing lower income people. Meanwhile the data shows that everyone is fleeing left-wing governed places like CA and NY for right wing places like FL and TX. Of course DC is somewhat immune to this due to Fed government; but everyone with eyes can see the decline of MoCo; looks like Arlington is next.

In Arlington, we do have zoning laws for a “reason.” The “reason” was to avoid building the types of low slung row and duplex homes that were attractive to lower income and Black people. You saw them popping up all over in the neighborhoods developed prior to 1938. But don’t let facts get in the way of your uninformed, ahistorical right wing victim narrative.

What's wrong with the fact that people who make good money don't want to live in the same neighborhood as people with low incomes? There's literally nothing wrong with that.

I have a huge problem with it because the schools are zoned based on where you live, but they are paid with by public funds. Most of those funds come from high rises and larger commercial buildings btw, not singe family homes.

If everyone was willing to enter their kid in a lottery for public achools, I would probably care less.

You don’t want your kid to go to school with “the poors”? GTFO.

The issue is that people use racist housing policy to create segregated neighborhood schools (the "good" schools is what people like to call them). You can't seriously be so obtuse.

It’s a free country. If you’re so bothered by “segregated” schools you should enroll your kids in a school where they are a minority.

If you're so bothered by density you should move to the boonies.

Perfect! I’m not bothered by density. I’m bothered when my boonies become zoned for density. Which is what you are fighting for.

So when are going to make that move so you can live out your principles and have your kids enrolled in an underperforming school district? Surely if you were serious about fighting “segregation” you would not be in 22207?

22207 is not the boonies and this is an issue that needs to be addressed by policy, not individual citizens. It's seriously like talking to a bunch of 5 year olds on this board sometimes.

Too funny. You can’t even uphold your own principles, which you then want the government to impose on others. You’re a hypocrite and a fool, but I have never encountered a YIMBY who wasn’t.