Hm, no need to take it so personally, particularly since now you're getting into the history of my profession. Cities exist in four dimensions, and personally I like places that have a long history -- even turning down an offer to move to the west coast on largely those grounds. Sure, that's purely subjective and perhaps unusual in a society that's always racing towards the latest frontier, but "character" is always subjective. I'm hardly an anti-modern snob; I live in Southwest (by far the least "charming" part of the District by every account), I'm a member of docomomo, and have gotten nearly excommunicated by some of the classical architecture folks for daring to speak up for modernism.
I'm not exactly alone in saying that Arlington's architecture just doesn't match the high quality of the planning:
From the canyon of stark gray high-rises in Crystal City to the monotonous beige wall of concrete that is Ballston, the county's architecture often doesn't reflect the area's national prominence.
"We need more buildings that sing," said Roberto Moranchel, the county's chief architect and urban designer. "We've got some now that barely talk."
"Look at this one," he said on a recent tour, pointing to Randolph Towers in Ballston, a beige high-rise apartment complex built in 1986. "It looks like something out of the Soviet Union." [...]
"When you put them all together, [Ballston] can be really monotonous," [county urban designer Anthony] Fusarelli said. "By having more variety, the buildings can complement each other." [...]
[architect Enrique] Norten described Arlington's master plan of Metro-oriented growth as "brilliant" but said it wasn't reflected in the quality of design of the buildings. He called the county's architecture "worrisome."
Even if you completely remove car ownership -- and I have never owned a car -- the tax difference between DC and Virginia, particularly for the many people who pay more in sales/payroll taxes than income tax, isn't as great as many would think.
BTW, besides lead paint/pipes, there's not much about 19th century buildings that's toxic. Most of the toxic chemicals we worry about were most widely used in 20th century buildings.
Also, I find it mildly hilarious that I should be accused of being "anti-urban."