Umm. Did I mention housing? I am talking about retail. So I am not sure what BIG FAIL you are trying to catch me in? |
| The S Arlington haters will never get it, they are afraid of their own shadow and will never ever be open to any neighborhood in S Arlington. |
I think you're right. Which is why S Arlington will simply never be desirable relatively speaking. That's just reality. It may not be fair, but it's reality. |
What is happening is that the new development will be built to accommodate all of arlington's subsidized housing which is a problem |
I am not saying that is not a problem. Although, I was under the impression that the majority of new builds (north or south arlington) required a certain percentage to be affordable housing units, I guess S. Arlington is just getting the bulk of new housing right now so that is where it is winding up. Anyway, while I understand that lower income housing pulls down test scores and desirability of a neighborhood I have not found the neighborhood to be less desirable. I like all my neighbors, rich or poor. Although to be honest, there is not much interaction between the two. I was just responding to the PP that mentioned that ethinic stores were pulling down the commercial development. |
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carol-j-carter/why-arent-low-income-stud_b_2909180.html |
you are partially correct, yes all new developments in Arlington require a certain percentage of low income housing, but... the real issue is that south Arlington has a lot of existing low income housing units and the Columbia pike redevelopment is preserving them as well as adding new developments with set aside percentages for low income housing. It is obvious the county wants to dump the low income people in south Arlington. |
|
| You can' t even say the south will rise again because it was never highly rated |
|
Here's the answer to the OP's question in a nutshell as published in the WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323419604578573922977663926.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_realestate_mansion |
LMAO! I don't think so. |
The irony is that the less desirable parts of South Arlington are at least as nice as eastern Montgomery and much, much better than PG. |
| So it is prestigious to say you live in Arlington, except some low income people can also say that, so now they are giving the high class Arlingtonians a bad name by being able to also say they live in Arlington |
|
1. Pregentrification and real estate boom, South Arlington took a turn and as a result was heavily Hispanic. Many houses became rentals. Often military families hung on to houses and rented them out.
2. In general the 95/rt 1 corridor has always had a rougher rep than the 29/66 corridor locally. 3. W&L and Yorktown vs Wakefield (see #1) 4. As a result the higher end shopping was on the North side for years. However the real estate boom brought the South side back and a lot of families never left (mine included). |
|
I don't really understand the North v. South thing myself, especially since there's at least three sections of Arlington. There's South Arlington (south of Route 50), there's North Arlington (north of I-66), and there's Central Arlington (between 66 and 50).
I understand why people from Bluemont, Lyon Village, and Buckingham want to consider themselves part of North Arlington, but come on, really? |