Anonymous wrote:
Oh, the horrors.
Cute, no? Just need to retain your sense of humor about these things.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree with your comment as to the quality of the infill. Some new houses are very nice; some additions look raggedy. That's true.
But a "bad rep" doesn't have to do with neighborhood aesthetics, does it? Bad neighborhood, in my eyes, is unsafe, inhabited with questionable characters, dirty, bad services and substandard schools. PH has neither of these things. Biker gangs were a factor in the 60s, true - before I was born.
The only significant downside to PH is a lack of uniform visual affluence. Big new houses sit side-by-side with saltbox dwellings and chainlink fences. New or better-looking housing is between 25% to 40% of the area, and new houses are coming up every day as I drive around. Other than that, PH has walkable streets (with sidewalks), two large parks, good schools in walking distance, and soon a new metro in walking distance to some of the 'hood. So I don't think you can call it a "bad" neighborhood in the sense that people associate with bad neighborhoods in DC area. Mixed income, diverse, not always beautiful, yes. Bad - no.
9:48 here - I agree with 95% of what you posted. I'm just pointing out that an area's reputation includes what people who don't really know much about an area think. If you ask some people (who may not have been in PH for years) what they associate with the neighborhood, you'll get the following: chain-link fences, homes no bigger than 1000 SF, sagging roofs, no basements, toys left in the front yard, and at least four months of Christmas every year. That image takes a while to change, particularly if it still characterizes some properties.
I like PH. It has many of the qualities that people often want and claim they can't find in the region. The schools are very good. And the parents of some of my kids' friends who live in PH are among the nicest people you will ever meet.
Anonymous wrote:I agree with your comment as to the quality of the infill. Some new houses are very nice; some additions look raggedy. That's true.
But a "bad rep" doesn't have to do with neighborhood aesthetics, does it? Bad neighborhood, in my eyes, is unsafe, inhabited with questionable characters, dirty, bad services and substandard schools. PH has neither of these things. Biker gangs were a factor in the 60s, true - before I was born.
The only significant downside to PH is a lack of uniform visual affluence. Big new houses sit side-by-side with saltbox dwellings and chainlink fences. New or better-looking housing is between 25% to 40% of the area, and new houses are coming up every day as I drive around. Other than that, PH has walkable streets (with sidewalks), two large parks, good schools in walking distance, and soon a new metro in walking distance to some of the 'hood. So I don't think you can call it a "bad" neighborhood in the sense that people associate with bad neighborhoods in DC area. Mixed income, diverse, not always beautiful, yes. Bad - no.
Anonymous wrote:
Pimmit Hills does not have a bad rep. It is one of the few affordable SFH communities inside the Beltway with good schools in NoVa. It's as safe as any other. It is not uniformly affluent or manicured, nor is construction always in the bestest of taste, but it does not have a bad rep.
I see at least five new construction sites driving to Rt 7 every day. If you are interested in builder names, you can drive around the neighborhood and take note of who's building there now. You should have no shortage of names because of so much infill construction.
Anonymous wrote:Is it worth it? I know Pimmit Hills has a bad rep. How much would you pay for a new home in Pimmit Hills assuming its 2000-3000 sq ft and .25 acres?
Anonymous wrote:Is it worth it? I know Pimmit Hills has a bad rep. How much would you pay for a new home in Pimmit Hills assuming its 2000-3000 sq ft and .25 acres?