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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG, this is a thread that will never die.

That being said, MM was struck down and ain't coming back HAHAHAHAHAHA get rekt yimby scum

Another dumb ass…that ruling was overturned.

It’s already back.

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?

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.

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

Anonymous wrote:OMG, this is a thread that will never die.

That being said, MM was struck down and ain't coming back HAHAHAHAHAHA get rekt yimby scum

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Logic is easy --- the homeowner did not put the metro there.

Homeowners are not dictators. Believe it or not.

No one is asking to be a dictator. But if you really wanted to pack more people in, you would give current homeowners the ability to interview potential residents for compatibility with the neighborhoods culture and values.

But of course you're not actually interested in density. You want to run a forced sociology experiment.

That’s one of the most asinine posts on DCUM.

Even without greater density, WTF stupid idea is this? So it’s a Co-Op board for the entire area…new SFH owners included?

BTW…go live in a Co-Op if you want this.

You're proving my point. You don't care at all what the existing homeowners want.

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Logic is easy --- the homeowner did not put the metro there.

Homeowners are not dictators. Believe it or not.

No one is asking to be a dictator. But if you really wanted to pack more people in, you would give current homeowners the ability to interview potential residents for compatibility with the neighborhoods culture and values.

But of course you're not actually interested in density. You want to run a forced sociology experiment.

That’s one of the most asinine posts on DCUM.

Even without greater density, WTF stupid idea is this? So it’s a Co-Op board for the entire area…new SFH owners included?

BTW…go live in a Co-Op if you want this.

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Logic is easy --- the homeowner did not put the metro there.

Homeowners are not dictators. Believe it or not.

No one is asking to be a dictator. But if you really wanted to pack more people in, you would give current homeowners the ability to interview potential residents for compatibility with the neighborhoods culture and values.

But of course you're not actually interested in density. You want to run a forced sociology experiment.

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Logic is easy --- the homeowner did not put the metro there.

Homeowners are not dictators. Believe it or not.

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

Logic is easy --- the homeowner did not put the metro there.

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.

Please explain the logic of 2 million dollar SFH homes a block way from a metro stop. (A metro paid for by taxes)

I'll wait.

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.