Who said there isn't a North-South divide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure Henry was over 40% when it was awarded a blue ribbon.

Barely. It was closer to 40 than 50. It was just before they lost Title I status.

Henry lost its title I status because UMC families packed into the zone. You can look at historical farms stats and see that the number of farms students has not really changed at all since 2011, when the school was 46%. It added over 100 non farms students since then. It's now at 32%. This kind of turnaround was possible because The apartments in the zone aren't more numerous than SFH. The same thing happened at Oakridge - farms unchanged, an increasing number of UMC children crowded the school and brought the farms rate down.

The lesson is clear: if low income housing dominates a particular schools zone, it will lead to high farms rates. Even a little out of balance the wrong way can have amplified effects: witness how virtually no one living in a SFH in Douglas park - a huge, picturesque neighborhood with large lots - send their kids to the most walkable elementary school in the county. On the other hand, the right balance can attract UMC families and their resources in a way that can meaningfully improve the school, as was the case with Henry. Rather than focusing on changing the next year's farm rate to some arbitrary "good" or "fair" number, we should focus on creating more Henrys over a 5-10 year window and avoid at all costs creating another Randolph or carlin springs at Drew.

The best way to achieve this would be to balance high density low income housing with SFH/condos/town homes.

UMC families packed into Hoffman Boston and Henry AFTER those zones lost some % affordable housing. UMC don’t just decide to start sending kids. You need to look at stats from before 2011. Those areas have gentrified.

I looked up those stats. Between the 2005 and 2006 school years both Oakridge and Henry's farms rates dropped by about 15 points, to 45%. An overnight change. Why? Rezoning? Old complex get torn down at the height of the housing bubble?

When was Arna Valley redeveloped?

[Anonymous]

But I don’t think south Arlington parents have ever come together and just said,” We’re drawing a line. This isn’t working for us, and we are demanding change”
Just saying “ gosh, we’d really like to a have better SES integration” isn’t enough.
I don’t think 50% is asking too much. Not at all. I’m tired of the SB and the CB pointing back and forth at each other. Turn up the heat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

Lets push all the poor people out of the County does not seem to be a winning position in Arlington County, thank goodness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

Lets push all the poor people out of the County does not seem to be a winning position in Arlington County, thank goodness.

Yes, please stay in the county, but don't congregate near any SFH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

Lets push all the poor people out of the County does not seem to be a winning position in Arlington County, thank goodness.

Yes, please stay in the county, but don't congregate near any SFH.

Incorrect. Congregate near multiple SFH neighborhoods, not just three. STOP building high rises of AH on parking lots in schools zones that have more than 50% of kids on fr/l, across the street from a zone where 80% of kids are on fr/l.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

Lets push all the poor people out of the County does not seem to be a winning position in Arlington County, thank goodness.

Yes, please stay in the county, but don't congregate near any SFH.

Incorrect. Congregate near multiple SFH neighborhoods, not just three. STOP building high rises of AH on parking lots in schools zones that have more than 50% of kids on fr/l, across the street from a zone where 80% of kids are on fr/l.

Building more of it elsewhere doesn't solve the problems in the places where it already exists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To start fixing the poverty issue in South Arlington schools, you need to go back to the Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Plan and Form Based Code.

https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/03/Columbia-Pike.pdf

The plan was designed to ensure that South Arlington never gentrifies. The goals of the Neighborhood Plan state:

a) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current market rate affordable units (MARKS) with rents affordable to households earning at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI) within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,000 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
b) Retain or replace all (100%) of the current MARKS with rents affordable to households earning between 60% and 80% of the AMI within the next 30 years. This equates to approximately 3,200 units based on the County’s 2010 Rent & Vacancy Survey.
c) Retain or replace all existing committed affordable
housing units (i.e. CAF’s).

And the plan allowed for the transfer of development/density rights from complexes like the Barcroft Apartments (which are designated a "conservation area") to areas like the Penrose developments.

Rezoning schools to address high concentrations of poverty is like attempting to bail out the Titanic.

I can not imagine the echo chamber involved with crafting that bullshit plan. I’ve gone to meetings with one of my neighbors who helped craft it. He’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with south Arlington.
That plan is nothing that someone who paid 800k for their home would agree to, but I don’t see it being amended any time soon.
I do think of all the UMC of south Arlington came together ( regardless of whichever neighborhood school) and said we don’t accept any school in south Arlington having a FRL rate above 50%, it would make an impact. It would also mean they would have to involve north arlignton in some way to make the numbers work.

It comes down to different notions of what's "fair" in NA and SA. If I paid 800k to live in NA and send my kid to a school with less than 20% farms, it'd be natural for me to think, y'know, you get what you pay for. If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. I can understand that, but on the other hand, in SA, one might say, why is it fair for any school to be over 80% poor? That's not just some neutral outcome, like where leaves land on a windy day in October. We draw boundaries, we zone property, we encourage or discourage certain kinds of development. That's how it happens. Preserving huge swaths of contiguous affordable housing is THE cause of our segregated schools. Instead of "saving" all of barcroft they should have redeveloped half of it, and built new, not so fancy AH elsewhere to offset the loss. You know where.

Or not build it at all, since everybody seems to agree that it causes problems.

Lets push all the poor people out of the County does not seem to be a winning position in Arlington County, thank goodness.

That’s a very simple comment, and part of the challenge we are facing.

[Anonymous]

So how do most poster feel about this?
Do most agree that we should push the point of no school being over 50% FR/L?
Do posters feel its reasonable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The middle class S Arlington hate is unnerving. You shouldn’t have to be richor poor and brown to live in Arlington and have an opinion or desire for a good walkable school. Live right vote left by N Arlington is alive and well. Moving to N Arlington or Fairfax is not a viable solution. I doubt it will happen but I do hope the Board finds some balls and just starts drawing east west crazy boundaries.

The board are politicians. They respond to the incentives that politicians do, which is votes. Funfact: this supposed entity, the "white UMC SA parent" is a pretty rare bird. SA elementaries, including option schools, have only 1600 hundred white students, or about 30% of the total SA elementary student population. About 500 of those students are in option schools and the vast majority of them live in south Arlington and are zoned for a SA neighborhood school. Now subtract Oakridge and Henry, neither of which is a title 1 school. You're left with 460 "white SA UMC" kids, some of whom are certainly not "UMC", not by Arlington standards anyway. In contrast, there almost 5,000 white, UMC kids in NA elementaries. They make up 65% of all NA elementary students.

Whose parents do you think the SB is going to listen to in county wide debates over things like school boundaries, diversity, and proximity? It's about the numbers. South Arlington gets the shaft because it's not as big, and because a comparatively large percentage of its residents can't or don't vote.

Then you aren’t seeing the loom tide. Maybe the strollers in Douglas Park, Alcova Heights, and Barcroft won’t matter. Maybe those familes will do as previous generations have done- move or go private...
But I doubt it. The commutes downtown are worse every year..I wouldn’t count on past trends. The numbers will probbaly never surpass NA, but it may grow large enougni the next 10 years to make everything more painful and nasty than it already is.

You're not doing the math. If every single kid in a DP SFH went to Randolph the school would still be title 1. Barcroft apartments is enormous and will be there in perpetuity.

You aren’t looking at the big picture or far enough down the road. If you are comparing all of NA and all of SA as voting blocks, you have to look down the road at all of the proposed development slated for Crystal city. Those buildings will have families and they will not quietly accept crappy schools. It’s going to get so much uglier in 10-20 years.

There is A LOT of wishful thinking rolled into your arguments.... y’all still waiting on the that Columbia pike trolly?

So easy to be a snarky smart ass on DCUM. So hard to actually read about stuff.
https://www.arlnow.com/2018/07/06/report-arlington-will-add-24000-new-homes-through-2040/

Okay, I read it. Someone paid a lot for that study and publication of those really snazzy charts. I wish you well hopeful arlington ian. I wish you all the high end apartment buildings your little heart can handle. May all the jobs come to you and may your environmentally friendly heart soar when they tear down all the shit shack SFHs for high occupancy leed certifies buildings!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The middle class S Arlington hate is unnerving. You shouldn’t have to be richor poor and brown to live in Arlington and have an opinion or desire for a good walkable school. Live right vote left by N Arlington is alive and well. Moving to N Arlington or Fairfax is not a viable solution. I doubt it will happen but I do hope the Board finds some balls and just starts drawing east west crazy boundaries.

The board are politicians. They respond to the incentives that politicians do, which is votes. Funfact: this supposed entity, the "white UMC SA parent" is a pretty rare bird. SA elementaries, including option schools, have only 1600 hundred white students, or about 30% of the total SA elementary student population. About 500 of those students are in option schools and the vast majority of them live in south Arlington and are zoned for a SA neighborhood school. Now subtract Oakridge and Henry, neither of which is a title 1 school. You're left with 460 "white SA UMC" kids, some of whom are certainly not "UMC", not by Arlington standards anyway. In contrast, there almost 5,000 white, UMC kids in NA elementaries. They make up 65% of all NA elementary students.

Whose parents do you think the SB is going to listen to in county wide debates over things like school boundaries, diversity, and proximity? It's about the numbers. South Arlington gets the shaft because it's not as big, and because a comparatively large percentage of its residents can't or don't vote.

Then you aren’t seeing the loom tide. Maybe the strollers in Douglas Park, Alcova Heights, and Barcroft won’t matter. Maybe those familes will do as previous generations have done- move or go private...
But I doubt it. The commutes downtown are worse every year..I wouldn’t count on past trends. The numbers will probbaly never surpass NA, but it may grow large enougni the next 10 years to make everything more painful and nasty than it already is.

You're not doing the math. If every single kid in a DP SFH went to Randolph the school would still be title 1. Barcroft apartments is enormous and will be there in perpetuity.

You aren’t looking at the big picture or far enough down the road. If you are comparing all of NA and all of SA as voting blocks, you have to look down the road at all of the proposed development slated for Crystal city. Those buildings will have families and they will not quietly accept crappy schools. It’s going to get so much uglier in 10-20 years.

There is A LOT of wishful thinking rolled into your arguments.... y’all still waiting on the that Columbia pike trolly?

So easy to be a snarky smart ass on DCUM. So hard to actually read about stuff.
https://www.arlnow.com/2018/07/06/report-arlington-will-add-24000-new-homes-through-2040/

Okay, I read it. Someone paid a lot for that study and publication of those really snazzy charts. I wish you well hopeful arlington ian. I wish you all the high end apartment buildings your little heart can handle. May all the jobs come to you and may your environmentally friendly heart soar when they tear down all the shit shack SFHs for high occupancy leed certifies buildings!

Thank you, but a simple “I was wrong, you were right ” would have sufficed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how do most poster feel about this?
Do most agree that we should push the point of no school being over 50% FR/L?
Do posters feel its reasonable?

... crickets ...

See? N/S, we really are all the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how do most poster feel about this?
Do most agree that we should push the point of no school being over 50% FR/L?
Do posters feel its reasonable?

... crickets ...

See? N/S, we really are all the same.

See what? The question was directed at north arlington, asking their willingness to help. South Arlington as a whole already is 50%. That's the Wakefield rate. Sa would have to draw the strangest elementary districts imgibavle to get 50% at each school. The answer from NA is no. "No we won't budge a bit." wanting a neighborhood elementary that is 50% poor instead of 80% percent poor is not equivalent to the classism that NA perpetuates in school and AH policy. You feel bad about being selfish conservatives so you call other people that name. Nope. Doesn't stick.