Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wish I had a way of overlaying the demographics and the proximity maps on top of each other. I think they intentionally find the stupidest map they can create for demographics just to make people see how ridiculous boundaries would be if we consider diversity.
Someone who has a better visualization ability than I do: what would things look like if we concocted a mash-up of proximity and diversity?
You don't need a mapping program or spatial analysis to do this. Low income students are highly, highly concentrated in specific planning units. Basically, the Pike west of Glebe needs to be cracked across as many schools as possible so that SFH have a prayer of kinda balancing out AH at each school. Unfortunately it's a matter of busing apartment dwellers out because, I'm pretty sure, they vastly outnumber kids in SFH. It's a little different t than busing in the 70s and 80, because Nauck is largely a neighborhood of SFH and duplexes, then and now. We could have bused white kids in but that was a political no go, then as now too. Can't really bus kids into Randolph and Barcroft and Drew and carlin that aren't already zoned there, there just aren't enough.
Anonymous wrote:I thought from the beginning it should have been the diversity map. After releasing this ridiculous map, it should have been obvious to all.
Also. Randolph is 92% Farms.
92% and no one cares.
Anonymous wrote:I wish I had a way of overlaying the demographics and the proximity maps on top of each other. I think they intentionally find the stupidest map they can create for demographics just to make people see how ridiculous boundaries would be if we consider diversity.
Someone who has a better visualization ability than I do: what would things look like if we concocted a mash-up of proximity and diversity?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought Gilliam Place was only passed because it was seniors housing. Why are we assuming so many kids?
No, silly. The push-back from neighbor's only resulting in the entire building not being family-sized units. Only a small number are age-limited. But, even grandparents can have custody of minor children sometimes. I don't think there will be as many as other CAFs, but there will still be more. That block had no housing, now it will have over 100 units, all of the people in those units are low-income. Just how many kids is still a guessing game. Arlington Mill PU has over 88 ED students. Worth it to note that this was a Safeway and incorporated no housing prior to being built. Buchanan Gardens PU had been mainly 1 bedrooms and had few children. It was renovated to 2 and 3 bedrooms and now has over 90 ED students living in that PU. I don't think it's right that all three CAFs should be zoned to one school, especially when only one of those 3 is in the Barcroft walk zone. Gilliam should go to Fleet and the Henry PUs south of the Pike should go to Drew.
Agree with this. It is way past time to confront elected leaders and convince them that they need to coordinate and plan and distribute affordable housing in south Arlington, or get replaced by politicians who will. Yes, there is less market rate affordable housing in arlington than there was in the 1990s, but that trend is separate from our schools, which are more segregated and have a higher percentage of disadvantaged studentd than they did in the 1990s. That is because the people who use affordable housing now are families, whereas before they were working age adults. We simply can't keep building these 200 unit complexes without any foresight or evaluation of the impact on infrastructure, or any discussion at all, simply because AH is a political sacred cow.
OP here. Couldn't agree more. Now, what can we do to make the new boundaries better across schools?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Uh, it wasn't a Safeway, it was a Presbyterian Church. Have you ever been on Columbia Pike? But yes, will will have lots and lots of kids. And no, if the kids move out, then the family will need less space and move to a smaller unit (and pay less). So these units will still have turnover. That's not changing. These are family units intended for people with kids.
Since when? It was a Safeway when I was a child in the 80s. It was remade into a school for troubled kids in the 90s. Was it a church in the 70s?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought Gilliam Place was only passed because it was seniors housing. Why are we assuming so many kids?
No, silly. The push-back from neighbor's only resulting in the entire building not being family-sized units. Only a small number are age-limited. But, even grandparents can have custody of minor children sometimes. I don't think there will be as many as other CAFs, but there will still be more. That block had no housing, now it will have over 100 units, all of the people in those units are low-income. Just how many kids is still a guessing game. Arlington Mill PU has over 88 ED students. Worth it to note that this was a Safeway and incorporated no housing prior to being built. Buchanan Gardens PU had been mainly 1 bedrooms and had few children. It was renovated to 2 and 3 bedrooms and now has over 90 ED students living in that PU. I don't think it's right that all three CAFs should be zoned to one school, especially when only one of those 3 is in the Barcroft walk zone. Gilliam should go to Fleet and the Henry PUs south of the Pike should go to Drew.
Agree with this. It is way past time to confront elected leaders and convince them that they need to coordinate and plan and distribute affordable housing in south Arlington, or get replaced by politicians who will. Yes, there is less market rate affordable housing in arlington than there was in the 1990s, but that trend is separate from our schools, which are more segregated and have a higher percentage of disadvantaged studentd than they did in the 1990s. That is because the people who use affordable housing now are families, whereas before they were working age adults. We simply can't keep building these 200 unit complexes without any foresight or evaluation of the impact on infrastructure, or any discussion at all, simply because AH is a political sacred cow.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought Gilliam Place was only passed because it was seniors housing. Why are we assuming so many kids?
No, silly. The push-back from neighbor's only resulting in the entire building not being family-sized units. Only a small number are age-limited. But, even grandparents can have custody of minor children sometimes. I don't think there will be as many as other CAFs, but there will still be more. That block had no housing, now it will have over 100 units, all of the people in those units are low-income. Just how many kids is still a guessing game. Arlington Mill PU has over 88 ED students. Worth it to note that this was a Safeway and incorporated no housing prior to being built. Buchanan Gardens PU had been mainly 1 bedrooms and had few children. It was renovated to 2 and 3 bedrooms and now has over 90 ED students living in that PU. I don't think it's right that all three CAFs should be zoned to one school, especially when only one of those 3 is in the Barcroft walk zone. Gilliam should go to Fleet and the Henry PUs south of the Pike should go to Drew.
Anonymous wrote:Uh, it wasn't a Safeway, it was a Presbyterian Church. Have you ever been on Columbia Pike? But yes, will will have lots and lots of kids. And no, if the kids move out, then the family will need less space and move to a smaller unit (and pay less). So these units will still have turnover. That's not changing. These are family units intended for people with kids.
Anonymous wrote:Uh, it wasn't a Safeway, it was a Presbyterian Church. Have you ever been on Columbia Pike? But yes, will will have lots and lots of kids. And no, if the kids move out, then the family will need less space and move to a smaller unit (and pay less). So these units will still have turnover. That's not changing. These are family units intended for people with kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I thought Gilliam Place was only passed because it was seniors housing. Why are we assuming so many kids?
No, silly. The push-back from neighbor's only resulting in the entire building not being family-sized units. Only a small number are age-limited. But, even grandparents can have custody of minor children sometimes. I don't think there will be as many as other CAFs, but there will still be more. That block had no housing, now it will have over 100 units, all of the people in those units are low-income. Just how many kids is still a guessing game. Arlington Mill PU has over 88 ED students. Worth it to note that this was a Safeway and incorporated no housing prior to being built. Buchanan Gardens PU had been mainly 1 bedrooms and had few children. It was renovated to 2 and 3 bedrooms and now has over 90 ED students living in that PU. I don't think it's right that all three CAFs should be zoned to one school, especially when only one of those 3 is in the Barcroft walk zone. Gilliam should go to Fleet and the Henry PUs south of the Pike should go to Drew.
Anonymous wrote:I thought Gilliam Place was only passed because it was seniors housing. Why are we assuming so many kids?