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.
With the exception of Nauck, which is a slice of Anacostia nestled in themiddle of south Arlington, south Arlington is pretty nice. However, the home prices in south Arlington have skyrocketed since the recession. They’re now pretty comparable to north Arlington prices. I wouldn’t pay what it currently costs to live in south Arlington. North Arlington is nicer, has way better schools, and is now a better value.
Nauck is a pretty nice area, especially the section east of Glebe Rd. Shirlington Rd., the main drag through the neighborhood, used to be a little dicey on Saturday nights with people drinking on the corners and occasional fights breaking out. But there's nothing in Nauck that's even close to being a "shantytown" or that could compare to the rough parts of Anacostia. I grew up in the nearby Barcroft neighborhood and we referred to Nauck as "Green Valley". Arlington was very segregated in those days ('50s and '60s) and the white kids stayed out of Nauck and the black kids stayed out of Barcroft. Now both neighborhoods are pretty diverse.
Sorry that you misunderstood, but I said many are paying rent to a fellow renter, not the owner (who is unwitting or absentee).
Overcrowding is a safety concern for the whole neighborhood. Some of these people do need to be encouraged to leave or live in lower density housing. You forget that people make choices for themselves and are not infants needing assistance from the government.
1. If they are subleasing from the tenant, and paying rent to that tenant, and that tenant is paying rent to the owner,than no one is squatting.
2. They generally cannot afford to live in less density, and live here because they have work and community here.
Theres not really a housing shortage. Theres empty units in pretty much every larger building in Arlington.
People move. A landlord of a large building with 100% occupancy is almost certainly leaving money on the table - they need some vacancies for people to move into. In both office and apt markets the vacancy rate indicating a shortage is well above zero. And of course I do not mean a shortage in the technical economic sense - if prices have gone up, and the market has equilibrated, there is technically no shortage. But I do mean housing being priced higher than it would be if we did not have many legal barriers to supply and high enough to leave people living in the conditions described.
1. If they are subleasing from the tenant, and paying rent to that tenant, and that tenant is paying rent to the owner,than no one is squatting.
2. They generally cannot afford to live in less density, and live here because they have work and community here.
If the landlord is unaware that the tenant is subleasing, then, yes, the extra people in there are squatting. Many landlords are absentee landlords and are unaware as to what is going on in their rentals.
If the tenant signs a lease and says, for example, that s/he is renting this for his own nuclear family, then it is a violation of the lease terms if s/he moves others into the unit.
Some years back, one of the local news channels did a story about this problem. They focused on an area in Springfield where this BS was going on. A couple rents a house, says they will be the only ones living there. They have no intentions of living there and instead, buy some drywall and partition off the bedrooms, living room and dining room. Once that is done, they start illegally subletting. When the landlord finds out and starts eviction proceedings, it's a real hassle to get the squatters out of there.
Guess what? If the only way one can live in a certain neighborhood is to live in overcrowded housing, then it means one can't afford to live there. Those who get it know that they have to find a place that won't be near their jobs and thus, they endure long commutes.
How do you think people feel when they find a neighborhood they like, buy a house, then make that long commute to their jobs, only to discover a flophouse next to theirs? Can you imagine what that does to their property values?
Never mind the hazards of living that way. Once again, the electrical systems aren't meant to accommodate overcrowding. Nor is the plumbing built to accommodate that. Plus, overcrowded conditions are prime breeding grounds for spreading illnesses. Not to mention those illegal apartments in the basement that have no outdoor egress.
Overcrowding ends up affecting nearby neighborhoods that don't have flophouses on their streets. It affects them when, as a result of overcrowding, they get spillover parking in their neighborhoods. Let me tell you, when this happens, it becomes a quality of life issue. I know about this issue firsthand. It happened in our neighborhood. People were finding their driveways partially blocked by other cars. Many times, in order to block the driveway, they would move our trashcans and recycling bins. Others would just run over the bin! Some couldn't get their mail delivered because the letter carrier couldn't access the mailbox. We had people who would park, then hang around waiting for someone to pick them up. This happened all hours of the day. Then there were those who threw their trash on others' front lawns. We had to fight the county in order to make our neighborhood a permit parking zone--- a long process that took over 2 years before it happened.
There is nothing innocent about overcrowded housing.
If the landlord is unaware that the tenant is subleasing, then, yes, the extra people in there are squatting. Many landlords are absentee landlords and are unaware as to what is going on in their rentals.
If the tenant signs a lease and says, for example, that s/he is renting this for his own nuclear family, then it is a violation of the lease terms if s/he moves others into the unit.
It is a violation of the lease terms, I did not say otherwise. It is not what is normally meant by the term "squatting" - which means occupying a residence without paying rent.
If someone fails to do required maintenance on their unit, or to keep required renters insurance, etc, they are in violation of their lease, but few would call it squatting, which definitely implies something else.
There is nothing innocent about overcrowded housing.
I agree its an undesirable situation, but my focus is to address the conditions that lead to it, rather than simply try to push people yet further away from their work or into worse conditions.
I agree its an undesirable situation, but my focus is to address the conditions that lead to it, rather than simply try to push people yet further away from their work or into worse conditions.
People are already (and have for many years) been pushed "yet further away from their work".
All one has to do is look at people in LoCo who commute on a daily basis into DC. Never mind LoCo, some are coming in from Clarke County, Frederick County and Jefferson County. From the south, there are people coming in from Stafford and Spotsylvania counties.
Don't you think that many of the above mentioned people would love to have a shorter commute? The difference between them and those who deliberately overcrowd is that the former group knows better than to live in overcrowded flophouses.
At the turn of the 20th century, there was a big push to put an end to overcrowded housing because people understood that they were fire hazards and the cause of illnesses spreading. Yet here we are in the 21st century facing this problem yet again. IMO, the reason nothing is being done about it now is due to so-called political correctness which paralyzes those in charge from tackling this problem.
People move. A landlord of a large building with 100% occupancy is almost certainly leaving money on the table - they need some vacancies for people to move into. In both office and apt markets the vacancy rate indicating a shortage is well above zero. And of course I do not mean a shortage in the technical economic sense - if prices have gone up, and the market has equilibrated, there is technically no shortage. But I do mean housing being priced higher than it would be if we did not have many legal barriers to supply and high enough to leave people living in the conditions described.
I've been looking for apartments in central/north Arlington on several occasions over the last decade and never found it especially hard to find a place. The issue is that if I want to spend less than a certain upward trending sum, I'd be looking at a dump, something quite far out and far from the Metro or a room in a shared place. In that time span, several new apartment buildings have been opened in Arlington and what do you think the developers did: (a) offer lower prices to invite the constituency that struggles to find a place (b) offer prices that push everyone except the very affluent into apartment shares. You know the answer.
Now if you build more and more of those apartment complexes..will the developers lower prices? No, and I tell you why..because once the first Guatemalan clan moves in it's game over for the 'nice places' no matter if 99% of your potential tenants are young Democrats or not. Real estate tends to be pretty brutal like that.
The idea that people who can't afford to live in an area should get a pass to live in overcrowded tenements or duplexes is a strange one. Worse still is the idea that Government should somehow intervene (more so than it already does) by guaranteeing people homes. What gets lost in the conversation is the individual -- people make choices for themselves and do not need to be incentivized by the government to overcrowd. There are few Hispanic families in Fredericksburg as of now, maybe that will change or maybe that won't but that's what you have to do to live in the area these days on a shoestring budget. Or you can move to a new city that's struggling, like Baltimore, and build it up -- that's the American way.
People are already (and have for many years) been pushed "yet further away from their work".
All one has to do is look at people in LoCo who commute on a daily basis into DC. Never mind LoCo, some are coming in from Clarke County, Frederick County and Jefferson County. From the south, there are people coming in from Stafford and Spotsylvania counties.
Don't you think that many of the above mentioned people would love to have a shorter commute? The difference between them and those who deliberately overcrowd is that the former group knows better than to live in overcrowded flophouses.
1. I don 't think its a great idea having people commute such long distances - its a problem in terms of road congestion, in terms of health effects on drivers, in terms of family life, and in terms of the environment.
2. The cost to do that commute may be out of reach for some people and some do not even have a drivers license. And some may face hours of work that make that especially difficult.
At the turn of the 20th century, there was a big push to put an end to overcrowded housing because people understood that they were fire hazards and the cause of illnesses spreading. Yet here we are in the 21st century facing this problem yet again.
That push included a large scale investment in public housing, large scale production of dense private multifamily housing (with generally few zoning restrictions) and large scale investment in transit. I agree that those are better approaches. But until we are ready to do that, pushing people out of overcrowded housing will likely mean more people sleeping on the street.
In that time span, several new apartment buildings have been opened in Arlington and what do you think the developers did: (a) offer lower prices to invite the constituency that struggles to find a place (b) offer prices that push everyone except the very affluent into apartment shares. You know the answer.
1. Brand new apartment complexes are not going to get the people at the bottom. They will get some of the people who might otherwise move to a slightly older luxury apt complex. Which in turn will get some of the people who might have moved to a less luxury place, etc. Its called "filtering"
2. The new apt buildings in North Arlington have not been enough to offset growth in demand. Our region comntinues to grow, and living close in and close to transit (and esp in North Arlington with its amenities, low crime, and, for families,good schools) remains highly desired. Certainly rents would be even higher without the buildings.
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.
