Redeveloping Alexandria's Waterfront
http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2012-01-12/redeveloping-alexandrias-waterfront
The Alexandria City Council votes next week on an ambitious waterfront redevelopment plan. The proposal- which would bring new hotels, restaurants and residential development- has sparked a spirited debate between rival resident activist groups and city planners. We consider the future of Alexandria's waterfront.
Guests
Michael Pope
Northern Virginia reporter, WAMU; political reporter, Connection Newspapers; Author, "Hidden History of Alexandria, D.C." (The History Press)
Lynn Hampton
Member and Spokeswoman, Waterfront For All
Andrew Macdonald
Co-founder, Citizens for an Alternative Alexandria Waterfront Plan; Former Vice Mayor, City of Alexandria
Andrew Palmieri
Chairman, Alexandria Chamber of Commerce
Related Links
Related Items
Related Content
View Alexandria Waterfront Redevelopment: Sites in a larger map
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I am a resident of the heart of Old Town (the area most affected by wandering tourists and parking difficulties) and I am a STRONG supporter of the current Waterfront Plan as written.
Delivering smart development that will bring in people with no cars, increased revenue, and a safe & beautiful new waterfront where residents and visitors alike will actually want to spend time is the dream, and this plan will achieve it.
The current waterfront is an embarrassing eye sore that doesn't do our beautiful and historic city justice.
The city government and employees have done an exemplary job of creating a smart and viable plan that will work for all residents of Alexandria and it is time for the City Council to show leadership and vote to approve it.
In December, I wrote a column that ran in The Washington Post's Metro section describing a viable compromise to help the city's leadership find a way to handle this divisive and difficult situation in Alexandria.
In short, my compromise proposal would allow one "boutique" hotel with 100 rooms along the waterfront, and at the north end of waterfront, we would place a medium-sized band shell for community and artistic events. Boston and Chicago have such a successful venue.
I hope that both sides might find more common ground and therefore build more consensus. Right now, there is not consensus.
We are all the temporary stewards of this treasured spot called Old Town Alexandria. It is an honor and a privilege. Never a burden. We should be very careful and deliberative even if it takes a little bit more time. After all, the town dates back to the mid-1700s, and we all want to get this right.
Allison Silberberg
Alexandria, Virginia
Since 1992, the Washington Post, like the rest of Alexandria, lived within existing zoning laws. In 2008, the Post decided to sell its property along Union Street and lobbied the city to improve its selling price by allowing higher densities and building heights.
The lobbying worked and the City, in private and without public hearings, tentatively agreed to give the Post its desired density and height increases.
Unfortunately for the Post, a judge ruled that Alexandria could not unilaterally and in private give away the store.
So, the Post decided to achieve its financial goals by working with the City to create a new Waterfront Plan, whose centerpiece is (surprise, surprise) increasing the value of the Post's property by rezoning with higher densities and building heights.
To achieve its selling price goals, the Post has spent huge amounts in legal hours, fees, lobbying and, almost certainly non-transparent political donations and other favors. These expenditures are small in comparison to the value of the additional 390,000 Sq Ft (from 230,000 under existing zoning to 620,000 under the Waterfront Plan). This likely represents more than a $120 million windfall for the Post.
City officials and the Post should share their conflicts of interests, so the public can decide whether the City has been unduly influenced in drafting the Waterfront Plan.
In particular, how many hours and dollars of lobbying and legal time has been spent on the private agreement between the City and the Post in advance of the Waterfront Plan, and how much time and expense the Post spent on the Waterfront plan itself.
If the Post and the City have nothing to hide, they should openly publicize all political donations and other monies spent to further personal financial interests. Only then will voters be able to assess whether this was a clean and fair process.
I am an Alexandrian.
Since 1992, the Washington Post, like the rest of Alexandria, lived within existing zoning laws. In 2008, the Post decided to sell its property along Union Street and lobbied the city to improve its selling price by allowing higher densities and building heights.
The lobbying worked and the City, in private and without public hearings, tentatively agreed to give the Post its desired density and height increases.
Unfortunately for the Post, a judge ruled that Alexandria could not unilaterally and in private give away the store.
So, the Post decided to achieve its financial goals by working with the City to create a new Waterfront Plan, whose centerpiece is (surprise, surprise) increasing the value of the Post's property by rezoning with higher densities and building heights.
To achieve its selling price goals, the Post has spent huge amounts in legal hours, fees, lobbying and, almost certainly non-transparent political donations and other favors. These expenditures are small in comparison to the value of the additional 390,000 Sq Ft (from 230,000 under existing zoning to 620,000 under the Waterfront Plan). This likely represents more than a $120 million windfall for the Post.
City officials and the Post should share their conflicts of interests, so the public can decide whether the City has been unduly influenced in drafting the Waterfront Plan.
In particular, how many hours and dollars of lobbying and legal time has been spent on the private agreement between the City and the Post in advance of the Waterfront Plan, and how much time and expense the Post spent on the Waterfront plan itself.
If the Post and the City have nothing to hide, they should openly publicize all political donations and other monies spent to further personal financial interests. Only then will voters be able to assess whether this was a clean and fair process.
Lynn Hampton of Waterfront for All said that Citizens for An Alternative Alexandria Waterfront plan had promoted many misconceptions, so I would like to point out a few of the misconceptions by Mrs. Hampton. 1. The Waterfront plan is only considering an 8 block area, not the 340 total acres in the Small Area. 2. The Plan will increase density over the current level %162 on these three sites, not %2 as she stated because we are not talking about the increase of density over the 340 acres. 3. She mistated that there would only be 350 hotel rooms, when what is being proposed is 450 hotel rooms. She also omits that there will likely be additional buildout of office and residential uses on both sites. I would also like to mention, and think should of been mentioned on the show that Lynn Hampton is the former head of the Washington Metropolitan Airport Authority, so her ties to toruism and hotels is well established. Lastly, when discussing the funding of the organization, it should of been mentioned that a recent event for Waterfront 4 All has been held at Mango Mikes, an investor in Virtue Feed and Grain, and a place the Mayor Bill Euille has invested in, and another event wil be held at Virtue Feed and Grain, where the Mayor was untill recently an investor, and is at present in a dispute over outdoor dining in the alley, which the city is taking to the Virginia Supreme Court to secure ownership of over the Old Dominion boat Club. All contributions to Citizens for An Alternative Alexandria Waterfront Plan have come from individuals, and as far as we know, known has an economic interest in the waterfront, besides homeownership.