Buh-Bye!
Hal Phipps, the Division Chief in Planning & Zoning whose oversight includes historic preservation and Board of Architectural Review support staff, is retiring. He will stay on part-time while P&Z Director Eileen Fogarty searches for his successor.
Mr. Phipps, whose title is Division Chief, Zoning and Land Use Services, is the second Division Chief to step down this year. Kimberly Fogle, head of Neighborhood Planning & Community Development, left earlier this spring to accept a job in the Fauquier County Planning Department.
The End of Condo Mania?
Several prominent condo developments in our area appear to be stalled or in trouble.
The condo project at 1602 King Street, which was to be designed by prominent local architect Lee Quill and had already been presented informally to several area civic associations, is now DOA. Mr. Quill canceled an appearance at the Upper King Street Civic Association just hours before its May meeting. The project would have preserved the historic Wardman-style townhouses fronting on King Street but some preservationist purists felt the condo building to be constructed in the rear would be too large and too dense for the district.
The Growler also hears that it's not local buyers but Italian and German investors who are snapping up the condos atop the Whole Foods Market at Duke Street and Holland Lane. Not a good development for potential owner-residents, who may find financing hard to obtain with so many investors and rentals.
At the Planning Commission work session on the Braddock Road Metro Small Area Plan last month, commissioners noted that several projects intended as condominiums are now slated to be rental apartment buildings.
And ironically, just the day after a City Council work session on affordable housing, the Washington Post ran a prominent feature article about two major condo conversions that have now been cancelled, including Monument Realty's Park Center proposed conversion at Park Center in the West End.
Affordable Housing
The aforementioned work session on affordable housing featured a series of stellar speakers, but curiously the topic of the rapidly deflating housing bubble didn't feature much in the discussions. Dr. Stephen Fuller of George Mason University flashed a slide which showed among other things that in the early 1990s there was a surplus of housing over demand. If you've been around awhile like the Growler, you remember that there was a bust in the real estate market at the very same time (along with a recession).
Conditions may be somewhat different now, but it still seems likely that cooling prices and overbuilding may help make housing somewhat affordable again.
Certainly nothing is selling in Parker-Gray at the moment and Realtors are telling customers to expect their sales to take at least 60 days. Some houses in our area have actually been on the market for four to five months. Prices are also being slashed: one near neighbor started at $725,000 and within two weeks dropped the ask to $695,000.
The question for Parker-Gray residents is whether or not we need more "affordable housing," which in the City's rubric usually means public housing.
And are there plans afoot to add more in our community? Stay tuned ...
13 comments:
Do you know something we don't about new public housing? Do tell, Growler...
Why did the Growler not mention Phipps in the context of staff turnover, generally? The Planning Department has a revolving door or has the Growler not noticed?
What is the difference between affordable housing and public housing?
"The question for Parker-Gray residents is whether or not we need more "affordable housing," which in the City's rubric usually means public housing."
Seriously, as if we don't have enough. No one in the area has a problem with providing rental housing for City workers. When are these City clowns going to learn? Real estate rainbow fading away and any chances of revenue and revitilization for Parker Gray fading with it, and they are arguing about sidewalk lengths and building transitions. Might as well just send us the next monster tax bill now.
The City has used Uptown for far too long as their dumping ground for the poor. Let other areas of the city share the public housing stock; the city requires one-one replacement by law but nearly half of it gets mandated to one place, and since the law serves as a deterrent to any public housing replacement, it creates "poverty in perpetuity"
"At the Planning Commission work session on the Braddock Road Metro Small Area Plan last month, commissioners noted that several projects intended as condominiums are now slated to be rental apartment buildings."
Do you remember which ones specifically Growler? Seeing as none of the so-called Plan has even gotten in motion, we are at the point in Uptown where if they built a park we would be happy. Harris Teeter? Most of us have given up hope.
Good question about the difference between affordable housing and public housing. The Growler thought there was a difference, but it appears most of the speakers last week viewed it otherwise.
"Affordable housing" as City officials and others use the term is housing that is within reach of individuals earning up to as much as 120% of median income. Many analysts apparently view "affordable housing" and "public housing" as part of a continuum rather than two sharply contracting concepts.
At the upper end of median income (80% to 120%), a municipality can use various tools to require developers to keep a few units below market rates, sometimes for as long as 30 years. This approach may not require expenditure of government funds but places the responsibility on the developer.
But at the lower end of the median income scale the government usually has to step in to provide subsidies, such as Section 8 vouchers. If the government entity is targeting the lowest income families, it must develop or own the property outright since there is so little economic incentive for a private builder. This is the classic example of public housing.
The Growler rather doubts that the City is poised to pack even more classic public housing in Parker-Gray, but some participants in the Mayor's April walk heard him talking about the neighborhood possibilities for affordable housing.
In attending the candidate debates prior to the City Council elections, I noticed everyone throwing around the terms "workforce housing" versus "affordable housing." Workforce housing seemed to mean housing for people with jobs, such as teachers, police, and municipal employees whereas "affordable housing" seemed to mean the standard public housing where one's rent was based on income, regardless of whether the tenant had a job. I'd say we definitely have enough of the latter. Great blog Growler!
Growler,
Nothing the City does with Parker Gray or Inner City surprises me anymore. I have watched with mouth agape at Planning sessions while people droned on about the need for more low-income housing and affordable housing in Parker Gray. Obviously they have not a clue about our area.
The sad thing is most residents here would gladly accept workforce housing or rentals or office buildings or retail or condos or any mix of the above, especially around the Metro.
Yet NOTHING gets built. NOTHING. Its so tiresome. One of the best solutions to the affordable housing issue is to actually build some houses.
And the constant whining from the open space crowd about the need for open space in Parker Gray is tiresome. Parks are troublesome because the problem with parks is the City has a poor track record of keeping Helen Miller and Powhatan parks cleared of crime.
To me, the workforce vs. afforable debate obscures the greater issue of simply not building more housing, and especially of not providing more density (i.e. height) to do so.
Its hard to find any builder willing to build new townhouses or SFH's for the "workforce" And I am not sure the City can tax any more than they do to pay for it.
Why is 'affordable housing' always talked about around Braddock/Parker-Grey? I've never seen any 'affordable housing' plans for the new Eisenhower developments or Potomac Yard. What a bunch of saps in Parker-Grey...can we build a land-fill behind the metro station? Trust us, it won't smell - bwaaaa!!!
It's not quite true that there is no affordable housing plan for Eisenhower or Potomac Yard.
Just last week the City Planning Commission approved a twin towers project in Eisenhower East by Lane Development that would keep nearly a third or some 28 to 34 units affordable.
In Potomac Yards, the proposal for Landbay G includes 60 affordable housing units to be built atop a new fire station.
I think the larger issue is proportion; how much do each of these plans accomodate for affordable or workforce housing as compared to the Braddock Metro/Parker Gray area? It seems kind of stupid to discuss affordable housing in an area like Parker Gray, which already holds nearly 40% of the existing public housing stock and somewhat ample supplies of affordable housing for residents. Compare that to Eisenhower; they dont have any affordable or workforce housing to begin with.
"Just last week the City Planning Commission approved a twin towers project in Eisenhower East by Lane Development that would keep nearly a third or some 28 to 34 units affordable."
I saw that and stared in amazement. So they can approve a 250 foot building but to get a Harris Teeter in Parker Gray or to rebuild the 620 Payne warehouse takes an act of God?
What the heck are Fogarty and the Planning Commission doing?
Can someone please explain the reason (the real reason) it's taking so long to get the Harris Teeter project going? Is there some kind of political reason or what?
Re the question about specific condominum projects morphing into rental apartments,
No, the specific developments weren't identified at the Planning Commission's Braddock Road Metro Small Area Plan work session. But Lane Development for one hasn't decided if it is going to go for condos or rentals at the ATA site in Eisenhower East. (There will be 28 affordable housing units if the buildings go condo, 34 if it becomes rental.)
The Lane project is up for approval by Council on Saturday.
Growler,
The DC Examiner picked up on the recent effort to get Parker its just historical designation.
Alexandria’s Parker-Gray neighborhood pushes for historic designation
PDF | Email
David Francis, The Examiner
Jun 13, 2006 7:00 AM (2 days ago)
Alexandria - The Alexandria City Council waited 16 years after the Virginia Department of Historic Resources recommended the Parker-Gray district in Northwest Alexandria be designated as a historic district to begin the process of registering it as a historic area.
Because of the city’s failure to act, residents in the neighborhood have been ineligible for state and federal home improvement tax credits. Up to 45 percent of the cost of renovating an historic house can be claimed in some cases, according to the Historic Resources Department Web site.
The City Council earmarked $100,000 for the surveying of historic districts, including Parker-Gray, in April.
The council has yet to begin the surveying necessary for the area to be added to the National Register of Historic Places.
The Parker-Gray neighborhood is near the Braddock Road Metro station. It is a historically black neighborhood; 45 percent of the population is African-American, according to the latest census data.
Sarah Becker, a neighborhood activist who worked to get the council to set aside money for Parker-Gray, said her home, built in the 1880s, would have qualified for the tax credits had the council acted sooner. She said she had to cover renovation costs without assistance.
“Had I had the benefit of tax credits at that time, that would have cut my costs probably in half,” she told The Examiner.
Becker said that because of the 16-year delay, the city should move immediately to survey the land and get Parker-Gray into the national registry before surveying other historic districts.
“I think this should be expeditiously completed,” she said. “What is it going to take to get to the top of the list?”
Alexandria planning officials did not return calls for comment.
Council Member Andrew Macdonald, who worked to get funding for the neighborhood survey, said he has asked the planning office for a timetable for the survey, but has yet to hear back.
“It should be done as soon as possible,” he said.
» Becker said the city estimates it will take two years to finish the survey for historic designation.
» Alexandria has five historic districts.
Post a Comment