Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to ideas... please.

I understand the small spaces and multiple owners on Lee, but it can be done. And yes, it will cost more up front, but it costs the county and community less in the long run if the schools have some semblance of diversity and poverty is not so concentrated. Unless the regulators here stop seeking as much affordable housing as they can get in the south, and fund a smaller but valuable amount in the north, nothing will change. "Cost" is not just the funding needed to purchase the land. And, studies show that the cost to purchase commercial land in North Arlington is not that much more than south. Someone did a study of purchases over the last decade and it was shocking that in some instances land was more costly in South Arlington.

The American Legion in Clarendon is being redeveloped as entirely affordable housing. It’s a fairly big parcel about 1.25 acres.

And within walking distance of ASFS, Stratford and W-L.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to ideas... please.

I understand the small spaces and multiple owners on Lee, but it can be done. And yes, it will cost more up front, but it costs the county and community less in the long run if the schools have some semblance of diversity and poverty is not so concentrated. Unless the regulators here stop seeking as much affordable housing as they can get in the south, and fund a smaller but valuable amount in the north, nothing will change. "Cost" is not just the funding needed to purchase the land. And, studies show that the cost to purchase commercial land in North Arlington is not that much more than south. Someone did a study of purchases over the last decade and it was shocking that in some instances land was more costly in South Arlington.

The American Legion in Clarendon is being redeveloped as entirely affordable housing. It’s a fairly big parcel about 1.25 acres.

Anonymous wrote:To build on Lee, the community has to buy in. They have not and many are saying it can't be done because the parcels are small. Of course that is false - just look at the shallow space available for the Shell on the Pike. It can obviously be done. They will also say their schools are too overcrowded (not that school overcrowding has ever stopped development in S.A.)
At most, new developments will have a set aside for the minimal CAF, but not enough to really change things.

Barcorft will never go away. It is in a special conservation district to preserve it as "Affordable", the owner has sold the development rights. If it ever changes hands, it will become a CAF. Greenbriar isn't that big.

Other ideas?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what is so controversial about boundaries. Some people will move. But schools across Arlington are all good, and after Fleet and Reed come online everyone will be better off when capacity is balanced and APS can finally get rid of many trailers. Start with each school's walk zone than start adding more bus-able students until the school is full. Move onto the next school. Repeat.

You def live in north Arlington. North Arlington schools are interchangeable. Strong PTAs, no title I status. All schools are good schools, including those in SA. But they aren't good or better than others for everyone who is zoned for them.

But please, do tell us more about how you chose to live in South Arlington because you value diversity so much.

I don't get why simply pointing out the enormous north south differences and relative homogeneity of north Arlington, economically, is so "triggering" for you. Still upset about whatever compatriot of yours said that 100,000 isn't a lot of money? But sure, I'll tell you again. I value diversity and if I just wanted to send my kid to a school without economic diversity I'd leave the area entirely. I'm not claiming any moral virtue. South Arlinggto schools aren't diverse. They are segregated, just like the north. But unlike the north, I see the potential for integration here.

I know, I know. You value diversity, but only as long as it’s the “right” kind of diversity in the “right” proportions. And integration is good as long as it’s the “right” kids being integrated into your school to boost your school’s performance but not if it’s your child being integrated into the “wrong” school, even though that school is where we really need to see integration from kids like yours to balance diversity and improve schools.

You seem confused as to what diversity is. It's a school not dominated by wealth or by poverty. Beyond that, it could take any number of forms. I haven't prescribed anything particular. You seem bent on finding an ulterior, selfish motivation for my support for integrated schools that somehow harms others. The Ruth is that integrated schools are good for everyone and I make no apologies for my support.

No, what I’m saying is that you only want to see those schools integrated if it’s someone else’s kids moving in to integrate them.

It is my kid doing that. I'm in South Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what is so controversial about boundaries. Some people will move. But schools across Arlington are all good, and after Fleet and Reed come online everyone will be better off when capacity is balanced and APS can finally get rid of many trailers. Start with each school's walk zone than start adding more bus-able students until the school is full. Move onto the next school. Repeat.

You def live in north Arlington. North Arlington schools are interchangeable. Strong PTAs, no title I status. All schools are good schools, including those in SA. But they aren't good or better than others for everyone who is zoned for them.

But please, do tell us more about how you chose to live in South Arlington because you value diversity so much.

I don't get why simply pointing out the enormous north south differences and relative homogeneity of north Arlington, economically, is so "triggering" for you. Still upset about whatever compatriot of yours said that 100,000 isn't a lot of money? But sure, I'll tell you again. I value diversity and if I just wanted to send my kid to a school without economic diversity I'd leave the area entirely. I'm not claiming any moral virtue. South Arlinggto schools aren't diverse. They are segregated, just like the north. But unlike the north, I see the potential for integration here.

I know, I know. You value diversity, but only as long as it’s the “right” kind of diversity in the “right” proportions. And integration is good as long as it’s the “right” kids being integrated into your school to boost your school’s performance but not if it’s your child being integrated into the “wrong” school, even though that school is where we really need to see integration from kids like yours to balance diversity and improve schools.

You seem confused as to what diversity is. It's a school not dominated by wealth or by poverty. Beyond that, it could take any number of forms. I haven't prescribed anything particular. You seem bent on finding an ulterior, selfish motivation for my support for integrated schools that somehow harms others. The Ruth is that integrated schools are good for everyone and I make no apologies for my support.

No, what I’m saying is that you only want to see those schools integrated if it’s someone else’s kids moving in to integrate them.

Anonymous wrote:Back to ideas... please.

I understand the small spaces and multiple owners on Lee, but it can be done. And yes, it will cost more up front, but it costs the county and community less in the long run if the schools have some semblance of diversity and poverty is not so concentrated. Unless the regulators here stop seeking as much affordable housing as they can get in the south, and fund a smaller but valuable amount in the north, nothing will change. "Cost" is not just the funding needed to purchase the land. And, studies show that the cost to purchase commercial land in North Arlington is not that much more than south. Someone did a study of purchases over the last decade and it was shocking that in some instances land was more costly in South Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:Back to ideas... please.

I understand the small spaces and multiple owners on Lee, but it can be done. And yes, it will cost more up front, but it costs the county and community less in the long run if the schools have some semblance of diversity and poverty is not so concentrated. Unless the regulators here stop seeking as much affordable housing as they can get in the south, and fund a smaller but valuable amount in the north, nothing will change. "Cost" is not just the funding needed to purchase the land. And, studies show that the cost to purchase commercial land in North Arlington is not that much more than south. Someone did a study of purchases over the last decade and it was shocking that in some instances land was more costly in South Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:Back to ideas... please.

I understand the small spaces and multiple owners on Lee, but it can be done. And yes, it will cost more up front, but it costs the county and community less in the long run if the schools have some semblance of diversity and poverty is not so concentrated. Unless the regulators here stop seeking as much affordable housing as they can get in the south, and fund a smaller but valuable amount in the north, nothing will change. "Cost" is not just the funding needed to purchase the land. And, studies show that the cost to purchase commercial land in North Arlington is not that much more than south. Someone did a study of purchases over the last decade and it was shocking that in some instances land was more costly in South Arlington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.

They won't cross 29 for schools. Anything below 29 will go to Reed, Glebe or Taylor. It keeps the J/D/N triad safe.

You forgot Tuckahoe. Also, Nottingham already reaches across 29 (as does Tuckahoe), something that is likely to continue in order to fill the schools up there. Especially if they go ahead with the suggestion of stretching Ashlawn's boundary south of 50.

Nottingham won't cross 29 after Reed opens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.

They won't cross 29 for schools. Anything below 29 will go to Reed, Glebe or Taylor. It keeps the J/D/N triad safe.

You forgot Tuckahoe. Also, Nottingham already reaches across 29 (as does Tuckahoe), something that is likely to continue in order to fill the schools up there. Especially if they go ahead with the suggestion of stretching Ashlawn's boundary south of 50.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.

They won't cross 29 for schools. Anything below 29 will go to Reed, Glebe or Taylor. It keeps the J/D/N triad safe.

You forgot Tuckahoe. Also, Nottingham already reaches across 29 (as does Tuckahoe), something that is likely to continue in order to fill the schools up there. Especially if they go ahead with the suggestion of stretching Ashlawn's boundary south of 50.

So what’s the deal with ASF that keeps coming up? When new boundaries come to that part of Arlington seems like there would be good diversity from the Ballston, VA Square, and Courthouse areas. Heck, the one place there is affordable housing along Lee highway is between Kirkwood and N Scott st.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.

They won't cross 29 for schools. Anything below 29 will go to Reed, Glebe or Taylor. It keeps the J/D/N triad safe.

You forgot Tuckahoe. Also, Nottingham already reaches across 29 (as does Tuckahoe), something that is likely to continue in order to fill the schools up there. Especially if they go ahead with the suggestion of stretching Ashlawn's boundary south of 50.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.

They won't cross 29 for schools. Anything below 29 will go to Reed, Glebe or Taylor. It keeps the J/D/N triad safe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s not about building on Lee. It’s about building N of Lee, even if just on the N side. Anything below Lee won’t improve diversity in the least diverse schools. Jamestown, Discovery and friends won’t ever cross 29.

There are big plans to build on Lee highway even north of it. The Tuckahoe PTA knows about it, I guess you do not. Friends cross Lee highway all the time so try again.

Oh, come on. Even when a developer got the Sun Trust property, they decided to put townhouses on it rather than a high-rise apartment building.