Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It they do this, they need to do whatever it takes to keep the "affordable housing" lobbyists and nonprofit groups out.
the whole reason to do this is to avoid subsidizing affordable areas. There is no chance they would welcome affordable housing
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
What does the comment have to do with the previous one?
If size is the problem, if Fairfax is too big, then smaller counties must be great. Right?
size isn't the problem, the poors are. McClean city would have a much better rich to poor ratio (maybe they could find a way to draw lines to have no poors).
Troll fail.
Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone saying they move move to McLean when they could actually move to FCCPS today and get this? If you think because McLean is cheaper, it won't be once that actually happens...
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
What does the comment have to do with the previous one?
If size is the problem, if Fairfax is too big, then smaller counties must be great. Right?
size isn't the problem, the poors are. McClean city would have a much better rich to poor ratio (maybe they could find a way to draw lines to have no poors).
Anonymous wrote:It they do this, they need to do whatever it takes to keep the "affordable housing" lobbyists and nonprofit groups out.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
What does the comment have to do with the previous one?
If size is the problem, if Fairfax is too big, then smaller counties must be great. Right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
Arlington County has nothing to do with this. This would be more like Falls Church City.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
What does the comment have to do with the previous one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.
I know, right? Arlington is so much better!!! Well managed county, excellent school district with no major impending disaster...
Anonymous wrote:If this gets traction,, it will get interesting very fast. So many questions - would Great Falls be included? - what other neighborhoods would be included? I imagine a lot would want to be.
Clearly, its not happening for at least 4 years. But it would take 4 years to really plan that out anyway.
FC is really too large. It would be good to start carving it up to make it more manageable.