Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't make assumptions about why I moved here. I moved here because my old neighborhood in Manassas was destroyed by people crowding into flophouses. My next door neighbors got caught breaking into my house trying to steal computers (caught red handed with a laptop). Nice neighbors. The police found 11 people in there, 3 separate "families" - all crowded into a 3 bedroom townhouse with 1400 square feet above ground (and a 700 square foot basement that was a fire hazard due to being spread wall to wall with mattresses). One of them was an illegal immigrant to on top of it all - I guess stealing computers from your direct neighbor was seen as a way to improve their standard of living here. They had so little room they threw a lot of old furniture out on their deck, which eventually collapsed, breaking the fence adjoining their property and mine in the back yard, and then their "landlord" went bankrupt, forcing me to pay for the damage.
You're bitter against Manassas because you were the victim of crime. I was robbed in high school in an affluent suburb of Scranton, PA. Most of a family in an exclusive part of Connecticut was just heinously wiped out during a home invasion. There have been two muggings over the past two months near me at Lake Anne in Reston. Crime can (and does) happen in the nicest of suburban locales as well as in urbanized areas. With the majority of Americans now living in suburbs it makes sense that crime is going to follow as well. I'm sorry you had that experience, and I'm guessing for you that was your "final straw". However, even if I become a victim of crime once moving to Pittsburgh that won't deter me from my goal of wanting to add more stability to a neighborhood in need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngadude
Not "EVERYONE" wants to live in a cul-de-sac - but yes, some people do. Yet you want to deny those people the choice. I'm not denying people the choice to live in dense housing, why are you trying to force your will upon other people?
Show me how a cul-de-sac benefits the common good as opposed to just providing its own residents with a level of exclusivity. They have been proven to be one of the most car-dependent (if not THE most car-dependent) sorts of streets around. Your cul-de-sac bleeds into another street that ends in a cul-de-sac, which probably leads to a main road in your subdivision, which probably leads to another road that eventually bleeds into Route 29. Most residents of Gainesville's cul-de-sacs probably couldn't easily walk to shopping/restaurants that may only be a mile away "as the crow flies" because it would be twice as long to follow the twists and turns of the cul-de-sacs and subdivision roads just to get to the main drag that links that subdivision to other destinations. What does this mean? Traffic. What does the traffic mean? Soon more tax dollars are spent to widen roads, which leads to more development, which leads to more spent to widen those wider roads even further (see how wide Reston Parkway is near the Town Center as a prime example).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngadude
Stop making assumptions as to why people moved to where they are. Unless you know someone and asked them why they moved, you can't possibly get inside their head and guess why they choose to live where they do. There's a multitude of reasons people have (and not just one reason per person) for picking where they live.
I already knew you moved to Gainesville because you wanted to improve your quality-of-life. That wasn't a difficult assumption to have made given your disdain for your former neighborhood. I wasn't passing judgment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngadude
You didn't mean to be offensive in starting this thread? Then why would you write a phrase like "What's the "upside" to dealing with the traffic headaches there, the lengthy commutes, and the ugly scenery?" I don't think the stretch you drove on Rt. 29 is full of ugly scenery - other than the railroad track area. It's lined with trees - but as usual you choose to single out something and generalize it to the extreme - just to try and be controversial. Well, you succeeded, but don't try and claim you didn't mean to be offensive when you drive through a place for 10 minutes and post something like that. You could have worded it far different if you "didn't mean to be offensive".
Different strokes for different folks. I don't consider the Route 29 corridor through Gainesville to be "scenic." Period. People slam Pittsburgh, my soon-to-be-hometown, left and right, but you don't see me getting "heated" over that, do you? Route 29 is lined with a thin layer of trees to veil development, and many of those trees themselves will be gone in another 10 years to make way for more development. Sudley Road in Manassas is the way I envision Route 29 in Gainesville to be at eventual full build-out, and I don't think that's very pretty by any stretch of the imagination.
I don't "try" to be controversial. My viewpoints and perspective on urban sprawl are actually shared by most on most other sub-forums I participate in. NoVA is the outlier, as always, apparently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngadude
We won't even go into personal attacks on here - that's a laugh!Of course, to you someone posts something contrary to what you said, and you take that as a personal attack.
I don't take anything said so far to be a personal attack. Your tone is very hostile, so I can tell you're getting heated and riled up, but you're entitled to feel that way since you're in a debate. I'm calm right now. When I get irked is when I'm "moderated" (to put it nicely) because OTHERS can't take the heat in a debate and complain against me while those others aren't reprimanded themselves in similar fashion when they've also visibly erred. It takes two to tango in a debate, and if you can't take the heat, then stay out of the kitchen. I can count the number of times I've reported a post on City-Data on one hand since joining nearly four-and-a-half years ago. Nothing I've said so far has been a personal attack. I'm not trolling, either, just because my beliefs are congruent with a greater national trend of desuburbanization and urban infill that has yet to catch on in NoVA.
Every neighborhood I pointed out to you is immensely nicer than Gainesville, and every one of those is indeed in a CITY.
It is your opinion that those neighborhoods are nicer. Obviously, since they choose to buy homes there, many people do not agree with your opinion and prefer a place like Gainesville.
When I see how run-down so many areas inside the Beltway are I'm just stunned that developers would rather tear down more trees for more cul-de-sacs and parking lots while entire areas of Annandale, unincorporated Falls Church, and unincorporated Alexandria, amongst other areas, are in deep distress. Why not improve what we already have first instead of just throwing our hands in the air and moving further and further out? At some point people will be living in Warrenton once Gainesville eventually endures the same issues that drove you and many others there from Manassas. Then the people who already lived in Warrenton will move to Culpeper to get away from the "DC influence", causing more sprawl THERE. This trend in America in the past generation or two of trying to get further and further away from social interaction with people by walling ourselves off from one another isn't healthy. This trend of driving our cars even just to the end of the driveway to get the mail is unhealthy. City living doesn't have to equate to living in Ward 8 of The District. City living could be Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Manayunk in Philadelphia, Spring Valley in The District, Evanston near Chicago, Illinois, LoDo in Denver, Buckhead in Atlanta, Beacon Hill in Boston, Brooklyn Heights in NYC, Ahwatukee in Phoenix, etc., etc. When did America decide "city = icky?"
I'm actually quite optimistic that areas in Annandale, Falls Church and Alexandria - with their relatively easy commute to both DC and Tysons - are going to be refurbished in the coming years.
Even if they remain as they are, however, they are far from "in deep distress." Here's an example of one Pittsburgh neighborhood that appears to be in "deep distress" to me. I challenge you to identify any similarly distressed part of Gainesville, Annandale, Falls Church or Alexandria:
I expect the absence of such distressed areas close to a place like Gainesville, together with the affordability of its homes, are but one part of what it makes it alluring to its residents. That may not be enough for you, which is one more reason why it's a good thing you're soon to have a go at urban living.
Original question was what's the allure of Gainesville? I think that question has been thoroughly answered. It really doesn't matter anyway because the OP didn't see all of Gainesville and will never live here. Gainesville fits a lifestyle and area that many like. If that wasn't so, then there would not be so many new houses and businesses in the area.
And to move the thread over to traffic woes and who is paying for it and complaining that people have to drive to get groceries is well... I'll just hold my tongue. It's simple... if I wanted to live in a city with high rise downtown area and walk to get everything, I wouldn't have moved to Gainesville!
If everyone could see into the future, we wouldn't have to redo roads, but no one is going to spend the money for something that may not be needed. To constantly gripe as to why things aren't built for what may or may not happen 20 years down the road is absolutely absurd.
Almost all of the roads and interchanges in Gainesville were built by developers as part of the proffer system. The proffer system is when developers agree to build certain infrastructure in exchange for approval of their project. It's how most roads, parks, stadiums, art centers, etc. get built in the burbs.
The proffer system may work to finance initial infrastructure, but then the costs of eventual upgrades and to upgrade the infrastructure of adjacent areas often relies upon state and Federal funding (i.e. the rest of us). Nearly a half-billion dollars is being spent by VDOT to make the Mixing Bowl West in Gainesville a reality. What good is it if a developer spends a few million to widen Linton Hall Road, for example, in anticipation of a new retail development, but then chips in nothing for the infrastructure people used to access that development from other areas? $400,000,000+ being spent by VDOT to improve the I-66/Route 29 interchange is undoubtedly mountains more than Gainesville's developers have collectively chipped in for infrastructure immediately surrounding their properties.
This is like noticing there's a hug cut on your arm that is bleeding (traffic congestion). Several people (developers) throw band-aids at you (proffers), but ultimately the doctor (VDOT) has to come along with the gauze to patch it all together to make everything work. It's just very illogical to me that we're continuing to spend so much money during a recession to subsidize new growth at the expense of existing urbanized areas that are being neglected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caladium
I don't understand the argument about Annandale and Alexandria at all.
1. First of all, neither of those areas is distressed, IMO. It's often more expensive to buy a home in Annandale and Alexandria than to buy a home in Gainesville.
2. The people who want the advantages of Gainesville would not find what they want in Annandale and Alexandria. Those areas don't have the open, country-ish feel of Gainesville. You'd have to level both cities to achieve that, and nobody wants that. Annandale is nice the way it is.
3. Let's say, for the sake of this argument, that it Annandale and Alexandria were levelled to become a Gainesville type of development. What would you do with the people who already live there? You act like Annandale and Alexandria are ghost towns that need residents. Not at all, there are many many people already living there. People who like their communities the way they are and don't want Annandale and Alexandria changed, either.
4. People tend to live near their jobs, and that includes most residents of Gainesville. If you forced them to move to a inner beltway area most of them would have much longer commutes. You'd be making traffic worse, not better.
1.) Gainesville is "shiny and new." The areas I listed, which include Bailey's Crossroads, Seven Corners, other parts of unincorporated Falls Church (especially the Route 50 corridor), unincorporated Alexandria (especially the Route 1 corridor), PARTS of Annandale (to clarify), etc., etc. ARE all very distressed, as they are home to mostly low-density strip malls, many of which are home to struggling tenants, and aging garden apartments. These areas could be improved with $400,000,000, but instead we're spending that to build an interchange system to promote more development in the exurbs. Why?
2.) Check back with me in 20 years and tell me if Gainesville still has that "country" feel given its current rapid growth rate. Gainesville will fall victim to the same ailments that drove people out of the areas from whence they came, and then those people, being transient, will move on to another "new and improved" area. Nobody is addressing the root issue as to why Americans keep abandoning their neighborhoods instead of taking a stand to preserve them.
3.) I would never advocate for leveling already established urbanized areas to make them more like an exurb.
4.) Once again I'll reiterate that the decentralization of employment centers here is a major contributing source to our area's congestion issues and transportation crisis. When you have people everywhere working everywhere, then it's impossible to build an EFFICIENT transit network for the majority of the population. What's going to happen next, Caladium? As Gainesville grows more and more employers will move there, and then those who think Gainesville is too "busy" for their taste will rush to tear up more open space in Fauquier County. If and when Leesburg becomes a more concentrated employment center you'll see more communities "affected" the way Lovettsville and Berryville were in favor of sprawling new developments. At least in Pittsburgh the city's Downtown, as well as nearby Oakland, remain the primary job hotbeds, and the city's traffic could be mitigated easily with more subway lines. I just don't see how you can easily and efficiently get most people from a place like Gainesville to a place like Reston, Chantilly, Tysons, or numerous other employment hubs without a personal vehicle. How good is the bus service between subdivisions in Gainesville and Metrorail/VRE stations?
It's not worth debating this, you made your usual snap judgement about Gainesville by studying satellite photos and driving through it for a grand total of 10 minutes or so.
I have to agree with what you said ngadude. So I've held back for the most part since nothing I say will change his thoughts on his 10 minute drive through Gainesville. But the good news is that the satellite photos on Google maps are only a couple of months old if that!
When I see how run-down so many areas inside the Beltway are I'm just stunned that developers would rather tear down more trees for more cul-de-sacs and parking lots while entire areas of Annandale, unincorporated Falls Church, and unincorporated Alexandria, amongst other areas, are in deep distress. Why not improve what we already have first instead of just throwing our hands in the air and moving further and further out? At some point people will be living in Warrenton once Gainesville eventually endures the same issues that drove you and many others there from Manassas. Then the people who already lived in Warrenton will move to Culpeper to get away from the "DC influence", causing more sprawl THERE. This trend in America in the past generation or two of trying to get further and further away from social interaction with people by walling ourselves off from one another isn't healthy. This trend of driving our cars even just to the end of the driveway to get the mail is unhealthy. City living doesn't have to equate to living in Ward 8 of The District. City living could be Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Manayunk in Philadelphia, Spring Valley in The District, Evanston near Chicago, Illinois, LoDo in Denver, Buckhead in Atlanta, Beacon Hill in Boston, Brooklyn Heights in NYC, Ahwatukee in Phoenix, etc., etc. When did America decide "city = icky?"
People already live in suburban developments in Warrenton and Culpeper, and have for years. It's not a new phenomenon out there, though there are controls in place in Warrenton because it's hunt country. Now, if we were to see conversions of some estates in Upperville or The Plains, then that would be a significant change.
So, we are to displace the poor residents in favor of gentrification for wealthier residents to be forced to live in environments that they do not want as in the case of the older sections of Falls Church, Annandale, etc.? Cities cannot survive without low-wage workers, and if they are subjected to onerous commutes that they cannot afford in terms of time or cost, they will relocate to other areas. This has a net effect of pushing prices for goods and services even higher because to attract a worker to deal with the hassles in cost and time, the business has to pay significantly more for an unskilled position than they would have to in other areas of the country. The housing that exists could be rehabilitated, but I do not favor large-scale demolition in favor of gentrification for the creation of housing closer-in that is going to be priced significantly higher because of land cost, relocation of current residents, demolition, and reconstruction. As Caladium pointed out, these are not areas of wholesale abandonment and decay. The other issue is that said properties that are slated for redevelopment are in private hands, so how exactly to we co-opt the right to property? We are not referencing publicly-owned properties in the aforementioned areas.
Brooklyn Heights is very expensive, where a small apartment costs the same as a house in Gainesville, so I do not see that as an appropriate comparison. Moreover, NYC has suburbs, even suburbs still under construction like Gainesville, in Dutchess and Orange Counties, so it's not a car-free, transit-oriented population that inhabits the Tri-State Area. NYC also has a profound housing shortage, which is why marginal properties in not-so-great neighborhoods rent for significantly higher than they are worth, just as a comparison, since that's a topic for NYC to discuss the reasons for it.
People have the freedom of choice in this country, and are free to live in the style of house, neighborhood, and location that they prefer, and that meets their budget. Why should someone be forced to live in a smaller house on half the land in Annandale, when they want a new house with tall ceilings and an environment that's removed from the influences of the city?
And, referencing the "common good" argument, why is it in the common interest to force people to live in smaller, denser accommodations? How does this not counter the personal liberty that is a fundamental aspect of the American way of life? Zoning regulations are an appropriate governance on the use of land in the "common good," as are individual neighborhood covenants/HOA regulations that are described at the outset of a purchase, where one has the ability to choose to live under those rules or not. Forcing people into higher densities, or into in-fill environments where they do not want to live runs counter to the personal liberty to spend one's housing dollar on the home of their choice.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
Original question was what's the allure of Gainesville? I think that question has been thoroughly answered. It really doesn't matter anyway because the OP didn't see all of Gainesville and will never live here. Gainesville fits a lifestyle and area that many like. If that wasn't so, then there would not be so many new houses and businesses in the area.
And to move the thread over to traffic woes and who is paying for it and complaining that people have to drive to get groceries is well... I'll just hold my tongue. It's simple... if I wanted to live in a city with high rise downtown area and walk to get everything, I wouldn't have moved to Gainesville!
If everyone could see into the future, we wouldn't have to redo roads, but no one is going to spend the money for something that may not be needed. To constantly gripe as to why things aren't built for what may or may not happen 20 years down the road is absolutely absurd.
No, Heather, what's "absolutely absurd" is that those of you in Gainesville continue to dodge the question as to why those of us in other parts of the Commonwealth are expected to pay nearly a half-billion dollars to subsidize more growth in Gainesville, during a recession, and during a point in time when there are many closer-in suburbs to DC where more people could benefit from that money with better communities. You chose to live in the exurbs. Part of the "trade-off" should be the accompanying ills of the exurbs. If we're continuing to streamline exurban living to make it "desirable", then it will just make it easier for more people to move to places like Gainesville, and then the "long-timers" who have lived there will feel the area becoming "too congested" and will tear down trees down the road near Warrenton to build another home in 15 years. Then the old-timers in Warrenton will feel that place geting too congested and will start to overrun Culpeper County. When will it end? That's all I want to know. Those of you who keep puddle-jumping further and further out from 'burb to 'burb to escape the "ills" of the more immediate metro area are going to have to STOP at some point once your commutes get to be too trying and finally confront important issues head-on.
Why don't my observations matter? Just because "you don't live here" doesn't mean my opinions are invalid. BMWGuy asked why people in Gainesville should pay to help subsidize the Metrorail system. Simple. Expanding Metrorail provides more incentive to build at a higher density near the new rail lines, which puts more people into less of a land footprint and will discourage the usage of a personal automobile, benefiting the entire area's congestion and air quality. How does spending a half-billion dollars on the Mixing Bowl West benefit anyone other than those already living in Gainesville and developers planning to develop more of Gainesville? I'm just not quite seeing it. NoVA is definitely on-track to become the next L.A. at this rate where so many of you want an exurban lifestyle in perpetuity while completely ignoring the region's very rapid growth and the NEED to increase density, which isn't happening. As long as this area remains an economic hotbed we're going to be having people moving here in droves. They need a place to live, and places like Gainesville can't be the answer, especially if the population there isn't even that large NOW to begin with and we're already forced to spend a half-billion dollars to fix things. How much more will be spent in another 10 years?
Well, kiddies, it's been fun chatting with you but my work is now done. All this talk of Gainesville has put me in the mood for driving out on Rt. 50 towards the mountains.
It's a glorious fall day and just the thought of stopping by the Gainesville Weggies for one of their subs has me in a very good mood. Not to mention the sight of the mountains, which really start to become pretty about the time I drive by G'ville. Sometimes I'm very envious of you ngadude, for having such a nice view. Have a good weekend, everyone, and don't forget to spend time outside. It's gorgeous out there!
People have the freedom of choice in this country, and are free to live in the style of house, neighborhood, and location that they prefer, and that meets their budget. Why should someone be forced to live in a smaller house on half the land in Annandale, when they want a new house with tall ceilings and an environment that's removed from the influences of the city?
And, referencing the "common good" argument, why is it in the common interest to force people to live in smaller, denser accommodations? How does this not counter the personal liberty that is a fundamental aspect of the American way of life? Zoning regulations are an appropriate governance on the use of land in the "common good," as are individual neighborhood covenants/HOA regulations that are described at the outset of a purchase, where one has the ability to choose to live under those rules or not. Forcing people into higher densities, or into in-fill environments where they do not want to live runs counter to the personal liberty to spend one's housing dollar on the home of their choice.
-As a very physically active person who leads a healthy lifestyle I resent paying more for health insurance because premiums and co-pays are driven up by those who have the "freedom of choice" to do themselves wrong by smoking, being obese, binge drinking, etc. Why should one's choice to be irresponsible for their own health detrimentally impact me financially as someone who IS health-conscious?
-As a non-smoker I resent having to inhale the exhaust of a cigarette as I step into an elevator in which the prior occupant had smelled like a chimney. Why should I surrender the ability to breathe clean air to give someone else the "freedom of choice" to smoke in public areas?
-As someone who conserves energy I resent that utility bills rise for everyone during periods of higher demand. Those who want the "freedom of choice" to live in a McMansion with voluminous square footage pay on their own with higher utility bills, but then the rest of us also pay because energy is a commodity driven by demand, and rates wouldn't be as high as they are if Mr. Jones wasn't heating and cooling the formal media room he only uses once per year.
-As someone who doesn't like to see our brave men and women dying overseas in conflicts aimed to unseat dictators who threaten our supply of oil I resent that people utilize their "freedom of choice" to buy Hummers that they only intend to drive to their offices, grocery stores, restaurants, etc. when they could buy a Prius for much less money and conserve more fuel, thereby reducing our national demand for fossil fuels and help to wean us onto alternative energies so we can avoid "peak oil" EVER coming to a painful reality.
-As someone who wants his own grandchildren to enjoy the same natural beauty and scenic vistas that he is currently able to enjoy I resent that "freedom of choice" means that a Wal-Mart and beige-vinyl-sided tract-homes on cul-de-sacs are viewed as being a better usage for that land.
It's also ironic that I still can't legally wed in this Commonwealth that is supposedly noted for its excellent "freedom of choice" in all the above areas (and others I'm not listing), but I digress.
I'll always have a "common good" mindset because I'm an idealist. I don't see how eventually paving over nearly every square inch of land in an arc stretching from Winchester to Culpeper to Fredericksburg with car-centric developments is helpful to the "common good" when you can house just as many people on a fraction of the land area.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
