Tonight is yet another milestone in the death march known as the Braddock Road Metro Small Area Plan.A community meeting will be held from 6 to 9 p.m. at Jefferson-Houston School. We weren't informed until nearly 6 PM on Friday what the topic of the work group would be, but it now appears it will cover (among other things), pedestrian walkways.
Oh, please. Where's the beef?
Let's take a little tally here, readers. To date we have spent some 25 hours in meetings, "educational" sessions, and walkabouts. At a time of financial constraint, the City of Alexandria has squandered, according to the Growler's rough estimates, anywhere from $100,000 to $250,000 on consultants who are fundamentally repeating the same touchy-feely seminars that were conducted in 2005 and adding their own time-wasting tomfoolery to boot.
What do we have to show for this effort to date? Precious little. Has this process actually taken us any further than the 2005 charrettes? The answer has to be a resounding "NO!"
Why? Because the community's most critical issues continue to be swept to the side.
Let's take stock:
1. Like the Payne Street condos in February, the Madison project will be coming up to Planning Commission in December before the plan is approved, with a design that is essentially unchanged by anything the community is currently discussing and debating.
Once again, the notion of site plans slipping out of the barn door calls into question the very legitimacy and purpose of the small area planning process.
With the Jaguar project on the horizon and its attorney telling people at the charrette that it is already a done deal, just what is this grandiose new plan supposed to be applied to?
2. There's been no meaningful discussion of density and how much is either appropriate or fair for this neighborhood. An airing of the preferential treatment accorded Potomac Yard and the 7-11 site has been censored.
3. The Parker-Gray nomination to the state and federal historic districts remains in limbo.
4. We are told to cool down because Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on Patrick and Henry Streets was removed from the last Braddock Road plan draft.
Yet BRT is very much alive and is proceeding to the Planning Commission and Council in the form of amendments to the Master Transportation Plan. Consultants even concede that these changes will trump anything in the Braddock Road Metro Plan.
5. Andrew Adkins, the single most valuable ARHA site (and the one which is most likely depressing our retail prospects) is no longer under discussion and will not be redeveloped. Public housing has been shuttled onto a separate track for discussion, although ARHA's properties are in the very heart of the Braddock Metro plan study area.
6. ARHA, the City and EYA intend to squeeze hundreds of market rate units onto the James Bland housing site to pay for redevelopment of a troubled project in Arlandria, yet are currently planning on relocating only a minimum 50 units of public housing out of Bland. Can you say "economic colonialism"?
7. We're being pressured to remain a "mixed-income" and "diverse" community. But take a minute to peer beneath the surface hypocrisy of this argument.
Only a handful of affordable units are actually being set aside here with high density development. It's really the millions of dollars in developer contributions that the City is after, and they are being drained from this neighborhood to support the politicians' housing agenda in other parts of town. Think Herb Cooper-Levy and the $10 million in recent City loans he secured for RPJ Housing to protect rental properties in Del Ray and in Northeast Old Town. Dream about the $1 million contribution from the Monarch, $1 million to come from the Madison, and more than $700,000 from the Payne Street condos.
Again, we get the density and its headaches and the nearly $3 million goes elsewhere.
8. The only filet mignon in this package of stale ground round was the presentation of Sarah Woodworth, who delved into developer economics and demonstrated profit margins under various scenarios.
But besides the dilemma of how to pry the City's cold dead hands off the developer money it wants for affordable housing, there hasn't been any identification of how builders' contributions can be reserved and plowed back into Parker-Gray or the community on the eastern side of the Braddock Road Metro station.
And where's the City's own investment in this community?
***
So after all this activity and churning, all of these meetings and charrettes, where's the beef?
It's time to ask Faroll Hamer to tell us in her own words, without consultants running interference, just what her vision is for this plan, what it is supposed to be and why we residents should waste any more time trying to shape it.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!
33 comments:
"At a time of financial constraint, the City of Alexandria has squandered, according to the Growler's rough estimates, anywhere from $100,000 to $250,000 on consultants who are fundamentally repeating the same touchy-feely seminars that were conducted in 2005 and adding their own time-wasting tomfoolery to boot."
The City spent 3 million fighting a lawsuit against Mirant they probably cant win, loaned 6.5 million to ARHA that they might not see again, and has a school system that spends more per student than any other school system in the region and then blames that spending on poverty, even though the City actively spends a ton of money in social justice, social welfare and other poverty programs, which in their essence concentrate a large poor population within Alexandria.
A check for 250k is probably no bother to them. After all its your money, and then when they have to raise taxes they will just blame Iraq or the House Republicans or some other entity besides themselves.
"With the Jaguar project on the horizon and its attorney telling people at the charrette that it is already a done deal, just what is this grandiose new plan supposed to be applied to?"
The plan exists so that ARHA can get their "funding" from HUD and/or VHA. After all, they said that they need an approved site plan in order to increase their chances of getting the money.
The Braddock Road Metro Plan - based on hope, greed, and chance.
"Andrew Adkins, the single most valuable ARHA site (and the one which is most likely depressing our retail prospects) is no longer under discussion and will not be redeveloped. Public housing has been shuttled onto a separate track for discussion, although ARHA's properties are in the very heart of the Braddock Metro plan study area.
"
Actually, it might reenter the discussion very quickly, if ARHA cant get its HOPE VI funding or VHA tax credits. There is no other funding source but the City then.
"Andrew Adkins, the single most valuable ARHA site (and the one which is most likely depressing our retail prospects) is no longer under discussion and will not be redeveloped."
Gotta disagree on this one. First 14 privately owned have to be acquired. So far neither EYA nor the city are willing to finesse this outcome. Then additional land has to be acquired in order to relocate current occupants. ARHA not citizens have objected to building high using Ladrey as their management example. People closely associated with the project suggest Adkins is at least ten years into the future if in the future at all.
"And where's the City's own investment in this community?"
The City's own investment is being spent on hiring Hamer's cronies. All for the good of City Council.
Interesting how we don't see them at these charades anymore.
Has anyone besides me looked at the Braddock Area Plan that was presented last summer and noticed an odd similarity to the outcome of these charades, where residents were hugely outnumbered by developers, lawyers, consultants and city staff?
"People closely associated with the project suggest Adkins is at least ten years into the future if in the future at all.
"
If ARHA cannot get funds to pay back the City on its loan then where would the other 10 million they need to complete Bland come from. They cant just borrow millions from the City without some way to pay them back. Adkins is the jewel every developer wants and its also the most important property in the entire Plan discussion as its smack dab in the middle of it.
As for those "14 homes" thats just P&Z poppycock. There is no mandate to assemble the entire block.
"Interesting how we don't see them at these charades anymore."
Pepper and Krupicka show but their silence is telling. You would think they might have something to say when policy questions come up (such as in the public housing session). It seems Rob is the only one with the guts to take on the City's entrenched poverty bureaucracy.
"Has anyone besides me looked at the Braddock Area Plan that was presented last summer and noticed an odd similarity to the outcome of these charades, where residents were hugely outnumbered by developers, lawyers, consultants and city staff?"
Thats why I stopped showing up. And judging by a quick read of the meeting minutes, it doesnt appear that anything has changed much.
Same stale thinking on public housing. Same ridiculous fantasies about density in condoes (right next to crime-ridden areas). Same useless lego exercises.
Why waste your time? Stay home and read the notes. You will get the same nausea in your stomach and you wont have to listen to jibber jabber to the 10th degree from consultants.
" consultants who are fundamentally repeating the same touchy-feely seminars that were conducted in 2005 and adding their own time-wasting tomfoolery to boot."
"
As anyone who has used one can tell you, the best use of consultants is to analyze and advise you on how to solve a problem. They are good for giving you a second or third opinion that can (if you find good ones) be objective (they might not tell you what you want to hear) But you generally use them to analyze a problem and suggest solutions or make recommendations.
Seriously, the biggest sham in this show is the consultants, since I hear no solutions or recommendations from them. The only one whoever analyzes anything is the retail lady. All the others (even Dixon) dont seem to add any value to the process other than being 250 bucks an hour facilitators. What does Dixon think about the public housing situation in Alexandria? What does the history "guru" think of the black history angle?
What
"It's time to ask Faroll Hamer to tell us in her own words"
She generally does give opinions on issues related to the Plan (public housing, density, transportation) but she doesnt really give a recommendation, just opinions.
It would probably mean a lot more if Hamer stood up and said this plan cant work without a rethink of public housing overconcentration for example. Since she would acknowledge the truth and stop playing the game people always are forced to play when it comes to plan issues that dont make sense.
"As for those "14 homes" thats just P&Z poppycock. There is no mandate to assemble the entire block."
So far the mandate is the developers. Having the front door across from metro adds value.
"It's time to ask Faroll Hamer to tell us in her own words"
People. Please. It's time to stop wasting your time with P&Z and its consultants. If you want public housing eliminated in PG, harass the politicians. If you raise this issue with staff, all they can say is that the City policy is that public housing stays. Start making your opinons known to the people who matter.
What ever happened to the person in the Lofts who kept agitating for development to replace public housing? Or have all the original residents moved on now?
Seems they are the most affected by Adkins, certainly are the closest to the projects, yet there is no protest at these public meetings.
As for high-rise public housing /mixed use housing, citizens shouted that down last summer and it did not reapper in the next "concept" plan.
"Pepper and Krupicka show but their silence is telling. You would think they might have something to say when policy questions come up (such as in the public housing session). It seems Rob is the only one with the guts to take on the City's entrenched poverty bureaucracy."
Paul Smedberg was there last night also. The presence of the three council members really helped to tone down the discussions. Attorney Bud Hart's promotion of the Jaguar Project as a "done deal" (with pictures, even!!) was way out of place last week. It was good to have Council there to keep these low-lifes in line.
I would like to see more dialog between Council members and citizens, sans Hamer's facilitators.
"Paul Smedberg was there last night also. The presence of the three council members really helped to tone down the discussions. "
And did Smedberg make any comments? Or did he just sit there quietly listening? Its great when Council members show up but what residents want is some actions or some policy review discussions.
"And did Smedberg make any comments? Or did he just sit there quietly listening? Its great when Council members show up but what residents want is some actions or some policy review discussions."
Agreed. But anyone can see that the guts of the "plan" is nothing more than a collection of building projects that have already received a wink and a nod from the City.
Speaking of building projects, both the Prescott and the Monarch are products of the City's much-vaunted "SUP" process, where the City negotiates on behalf of the citizens for neighborhood perks from the developer in return for allowing the developer to build a bigger building.
What did our neighborhood receive from the Prescott and Monarch?
As goes the past, so goes the future. If we have received nothing, why will it be different later?
"Its great when Council members show up but what residents want is some actions or some policy review discussions."
Like Adkins may take another 10-15 years to redevelop
Like the city is not now buying land parcels to serve as alternative public housing sites
The list of grievances continues
"What did our neighborhood receive from the Prescott and Monarch?"
1 block of better lighting and less trash, and some retail thrown in. Not that its much.
"What did our neighborhood receive from the Prescott and Monarch? "
You received almost 200 new residents who might actually give a %&#$ enough about the nieghborhood to keep it clean, keep thugs off the streets, and who wont be a drain on the City's budget.
"Speaking of building projects, both the Prescott and the Monarch are products of the City's much-vaunted "SUP" process, where the City negotiates on behalf of the citizens for neighborhood perks from the developer in return for allowing the developer to build a bigger building.
"
The SUP process has degenerated into a bureaucratic nightmare that drives most businesses and jobs away from our area.
Its amazing how easy the City can loan money to organizations with questionable finances and management controls and yet it can take years to get permits to run your business or to conduct a transaction.
And frankly, you would probably get more by just letting the developer build something than from "City negotiation". What specifically has the City negotiated for Parker Gray?
"So far the mandate is the developers. Having the front door across from metro adds value."
Sorry, but EYA had no interest in the Black Rosemont area in their original redevelopment proposal. They did not assume block assembly and frankly didnt care to do it. Thats your good ol P&Z with the brilliant idea to delay redeveloping the key public housing project in the whole plan so they can buy 14 homes.
"What did our neighborhood receive from the Prescott and Monarch?"
Do your homework and then come back to me.
"What specifically has the City negotiated for Parker Gray?"
More importantly, what specifically has the City put in place as a result of any (if any) negotiations?
If the answer to either is "nothing" then perhaps P&Z should be downsized as underproductive. No need to pay an entire department.
That's what the rest of us are getting at our jobs.
"Speaking of building projects, both the Prescott and the Monarch are products of the City's much-vaunted "SUP" process, where the City negotiates on behalf of the citizens for neighborhood perks from the developer in return for allowing the developer to build a bigger building.
What did our neighborhood receive from the Prescott and Monarch?"
Please, does anybody know if there is a record of the SUP negotiations, or of what the outcome of the negotiations was?
"5. Andrew Adkins, the single most valuable ARHA site (and the one which is most likely depressing our retail prospects) is no longer under discussion and will not be redeveloped. Public housing has been shuttled onto a separate track for discussion, although ARHA's properties are in the very heart of the Braddock Metro plan study area."
What never comes out in any of these workshops or sessions are facts. Like...
Public housing complexes damage people’s lives by putting harmful incentives in place. People, including all of us, work because we have to. Enabling people to not work, or work little, is just asking for problems down the road. (like we have now).
And giving people free or heavily subsidized housing places a huge speed bump in front of them. (like you also see now) If anyone in Bland or Adkins ever start to make decent money, then they will lose their housing subsidies. Not working can quickly become an ingrained lifestyle (as we all see now).
Whatever this track produces, I hope Hamer holds Miller to the fire about the performance measures the City seems to be asking for. What are the results of all the millions loaned to ARHA and all the time its going to take to correct the current public policy disaster in Parker Gray that is public housing overconcentration....
What are the results of all the millions loaned to ARHA and all the time its going to take to correct the current public policy disaster in Parker Gray that is public housing overconcentration...
"Overconcentration?" One way to resolve your overconcentration concern is to reduce the public housing percentage. How? By increasing the number of other types of units. Such as, adding lots and lots of units of the city perk known as "affordable housing." Sprinkled in with a few "market rate" units.
"How? By increasing the number of other types of units. Such as, adding lots and lots of units of the city perk known as "affordable housing." Sprinkled in with a few "market rate" units.
"
Which essentially translates into "lets bring a lot more people into the area who then will get pissed off when the public housing unit guests come"
How will these City employees and market rate owners react when the party shifts from Adkins to the new Bland or when Madden Uptown's problems spread into Euilles "new and improved public housing"
"Overconcentration?" One way to resolve your overconcentration concern is to reduce the public housing percentage. How? By increasing the number of other types of units. Such as, adding lots and lots of units of the city perk known as "affordable housing." Sprinkled in with a few "market rate" units."
Now that's a boatload of crap! It adds up to unacceptable density anyway you cut the politics.
I love living close to the metro and King Street, but abhor the ulgy and dangerous public housing, which, sadly, seems to be here to stay. What will I do? I'm putting my condo on the market.
Let me think aloud for a minute or two. What happens... if the city/ARHA were to build some "chatham square" type housing and then start, again, to sink.. up to their foreheads.. they'd have to unload properties again, correct? Well at that point, investors will have to purchase the "new" morter and bricks. I don't find that to be too bad of a deal. You end up getting a deal somewhere down the road becasue you KNOW ARHA can't manage money. It's like giving a kid $4 before heading to the movies and expecting to get change when the kid comes back home. The tough part is waiting for it... waiting for it... waiting for it.. but it will eventually happen. So what's bad with being able to take back some of the neighborhood after having ARHA do all the grunt work of building the units?
"if the city/ARHA were to build some "chatham square" type housing and then start, again, to sink.."
Bland has yet to be discribed as Chatham Square type housing. Chatham Square was built east of Washington Street whereas here the city mostly wants public housing to remain. Not that many public housing units are being transferred out. Be wary as the city was careful to distinguish between affordable and work force housing in its award winning Potomac Yard Firehouse press release. The plan is for Braddock to get the lowest of the affordable scale not the highest. Georgraphic discrimination continues it's just defined a little differently.
Ads we talk about redevelopment of public housing and Chatham Square, keep stories like this in mind:
he developer of Potomac Yard anticipates running into potentially construction-halting deadlines on the 165-acre development of the old Alexandria rail yard by the end of the year.
Before final site plans can be approved for more than 1 million square feet of construction, Potomac Yard Development must build a pedestrian bridge across the rail tracks, according to a 1999 agreement.
The developer expects the city by the end of the year to approve plans for a project that would put Potomac Yard development past the 1-million-square-foot mark, said Jon Lindgren, a land acquisitions manager with Pulte Homes, a partner in Potomac Yard Development LLC.
Alexandria’s parks and recreation commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on Thursday to discuss the developer’s proposed locations for the bridge and a dog park and its proposal to deed a narrow, 4-acre strip for a park to the city.
“We have a proposal for the location [for the bridge], but it needs to go through the community process,” said Duncan Blair, the developer’s attorney.
The developer proposes building the bridge just south of the Potomac Yard stores. The location links existing bike trails with the strip of land across the tracks that will be a park, Lindgren said. Once the strip is city property, residents can decide what kind of park it should be, Blair said. They also propose building a dog park near the Monroe Avenue bridge, instead of on the strip, as originally proposed.
Sandwiched between the railroad and Metro tracks, the strip is difficult to access, said Aimee Vosper, the city’s park planning division chief. As a result, it cannot be used for sports fields, she said.
“The city got robbed on open space,” said Judy Noritake, the parks and recreation commission chairwoman, who faults the city and original developer for poor planning 10 years ago. “It’s a scrappy piece of land and we’ll use it as best we can.”
There are many potential uses for the strip, such as gardens or rock climbing walls, she said.
The City is being handed 4 acres of land, in an area with no public housing at all (not even close nearby) and they are planning to do what with it?
Build a park for Potomac Yard "residents", most of whom wont be here for another 5 years.
That in essence is "the Plabn". The next time some bureaucrat talks about affordable housing or public housing resiting, mention this story to them and ask them why it cant be resited here.
I made sure to ask my Councilmembers.
Post a Comment