Anonymous wrote:Is the only answer to affordable housing in Arlington massive apt buildings? Do they not sprinkle affordable housing apartments in market rate buildings OR give out rental vouchers? (like section 8)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real solution to this would be to have committed affordable housing in Fairlington. Then they could have kept the neighborhood together (I agree it really is one neighborhood, and walkable throughout) and also have had SES diversity at Abingdon ES.

Actually the real solution is to stop building f'ing affordable housing. We do not have the infrastructure to support continuing to increase the population, especially a population that often needs additional wrap-around services. I have nothing against poor people, but I have lots against a County Board that doesn't give a crap about our students.

I don't support AH on the Pike. I don't support it on Lee Highway. It's like Green Eggs and Ham. I do not like it anywhere.
Rant over.

Amen. I could not care less about affordable housing. You can’t afford to live in Arlington, tough. I’d feel differently if maybe our teachers or firefighters or police officers were living in affordable housing, but they’re not. So let it die.

Flame away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real solution to this would be to have committed affordable housing in Fairlington. Then they could have kept the neighborhood together (I agree it really is one neighborhood, and walkable throughout) and also have had SES diversity at Abingdon ES.

Actually the real solution is to stop building f'ing affordable housing. We do not have the infrastructure to support continuing to increase the population, especially a population that often needs additional wrap-around services. I have nothing against poor people, but I have lots against a County Board that doesn't give a crap about our students.

I don't support AH on the Pike. I don't support it on Lee Highway. It's like Green Eggs and Ham. I do not like it anywhere.
Rant over.

Anonymous wrote:Oh god bless you all. We don't need more affordable housing in Fairlington. We need it in N. Arlington. (N. Arl. resident here).

Anonymous wrote:The real solution to this would be to have committed affordable housing in Fairlington. Then they could have kept the neighborhood together (I agree it really is one neighborhood, and walkable throughout) and also have had SES diversity at Abingdon ES.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly not all SF residents feel the same way, but it seems politically expedient that suddenly the bridge is the next best thing to sliced bread and Fairlington United's webpage is arguing that their PU should become a walk zone. I'd find them more credible if they'd made the case more forcefully during the walk zone review.

But why? I mean, if I can have the option of putting my kid on a bus on a cold rainy day instead of walking a mile in the rain, lots of people would opt for that. It makes sense to me that they wouldn't have rocked the boat during the walk zone review, even if they were naive to think that it wouldn't come back to bite them.

But that's the whole point. If you're not really walking all the time and would prefer a bus, then you aren't walkers. Most people are not walking and APS has that data. It's better for kids who'd otherwise be driven individually to be bused to school, better for traffic and the environment. If they can bus to one school, they can bus to another adjacent school just as easily as any other neighborhood that is on the table. It's their kids or someone else's. APS should select the option that provides the best outcome for the system, not just one group of students or another.

I don't disagree with you, in terms of what APS should do. I used to live in North Fairlington, and I always identified as "Fairlington". We would joke about "northies" or "southies" but it would never have occurred to me that they could be redistricted away from Abingdon. Naive? Yes, but it really is one neighborhood. It's just a very large neighborhood.

I lived in Fairlington too- and now I live in North Arlington. Large neighborhoods get split into different school districts all the time. e.g. Westover is a neighborhood- it goes to McKinley and Tuckahoe (and possibly a little Nottingham). Leeway is a neighborhood- it goes to Tuckahoe and Nottingham.
I don't think the 'but we are a neighborhood' argument is at all compelling. So what- we need to draw boundaries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly not all SF residents feel the same way, but it seems politically expedient that suddenly the bridge is the next best thing to sliced bread and Fairlington United's webpage is arguing that their PU should become a walk zone. I'd find them more credible if they'd made the case more forcefully during the walk zone review.

But why? I mean, if I can have the option of putting my kid on a bus on a cold rainy day instead of walking a mile in the rain, lots of people would opt for that. It makes sense to me that they wouldn't have rocked the boat during the walk zone review, even if they were naive to think that it wouldn't come back to bite them.

But that's the whole point. If you're not really walking all the time and would prefer a bus, then you aren't walkers. Most people are not walking and APS has that data. It's better for kids who'd otherwise be driven individually to be bused to school, better for traffic and the environment. If they can bus to one school, they can bus to another adjacent school just as easily as any other neighborhood that is on the table. It's their kids or someone else's. APS should select the option that provides the best outcome for the system, not just one group of students or another.

I don't disagree with you, in terms of what APS should do. I used to live in North Fairlington, and I always identified as "Fairlington". We would joke about "northies" or "southies" but it would never have occurred to me that they could be redistricted away from Abingdon. Naive? Yes, but it really is one neighborhood. It's just a very large neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:That's fair, I meant the most common topic related to the actual walk zones. The underlying concern in those comments about staying together largely relates to the boundary pushing north over 50.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly not all SF residents feel the same way, but it seems politically expedient that suddenly the bridge is the next best thing to sliced bread and Fairlington United's webpage is arguing that their PU should become a walk zone. I'd find them more credible if they'd made the case more forcefully during the walk zone review.

But why? I mean, if I can have the option of putting my kid on a bus on a cold rainy day instead of walking a mile in the rain, lots of people would opt for that. It makes sense to me that they wouldn't have rocked the boat during the walk zone review, even if they were naive to think that it wouldn't come back to bite them.

But that's the whole point. If you're not really walking all the time and would prefer a bus, then you aren't walkers. Most people are not walking and APS has that data. It's better for kids who'd otherwise be driven individually to be bused to school, better for traffic and the environment. If they can bus to one school, they can bus to another adjacent school just as easily as any other neighborhood that is on the table. It's their kids or someone else's. APS should select the option that provides the best outcome for the system, not just one group of students or another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly not all SF residents feel the same way, but it seems politically expedient that suddenly the bridge is the next best thing to sliced bread and Fairlington United's webpage is arguing that their PU should become a walk zone. I'd find them more credible if they'd made the case more forcefully during the walk zone review.

But why? I mean, if I can have the option of putting my kid on a bus on a cold rainy day instead of walking a mile in the rain, lots of people would opt for that. It makes sense to me that they wouldn't have rocked the boat during the walk zone review, even if they were naive to think that it wouldn't come back to bite them.