The Buckingham Herald Tribblog

“Voice Box,” hosted by Arlington activist and politico Christian Dorsey, made its debut last Thursday night on Arlington Independent Media.

A call-in show of local issues with a global perspective, “Voice Box” aired live to homes and was live in front of a small, studio audience.

I was on the panel of guests with three really smart people, all of us discussing new media and democracy.

Other guests included Julie Germany, executive director of the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet; Adam Lynn, policy coordinator at Freepress; and Margaret Tseng, assistant professor of History and Politics at Marymount University.

I’ve got to say that Mr. Dorsey is a natural host. It was his first night with this show, and he handled it with aplomb. Bummer that no one called in, but the studio audience was great, a nice mix of people, and some nice questions.

“Voice Box” will air a new show monthly. If you missed the first, don’t sweat as rebroadcasts of the inaugural episode will run until March 19 (Comcast channel 69 and Verizon channel 38 in Arlington):

Tuesdays from 7:30-8:30p.m.
Thursdays from 6:30-7:30p.m.
Saturdays from 10:00-11:00p.m.

The neighborhood has been hopping this week. The Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board fielded two big questions last Wednesday regarding redevelopment of the area.

One request pretty much killed the redevelopment of the Buckingham Shopping Center, and to the Village3 project, they gave a bit of the “go-ahead.” The county board votes on a portion of that redevelopment tonight (I’ll be watching that on TV starting at 6:45); see the story by clicking here or scrolling down.

A strong handful of people weighed in with comments on the story of the HALRB’s decision not to support the Buckingham Shopping Center redevelopment. Read the story and comments here before you read my take:

I can see both sides, and I write that not meaning to be politic or mealy-mouthed. I’ve watched this process since it began mid-2007; I’ve covered numerous meetings, and I have to agree with board member Gerald Laporte who said the vote shouldn’t surprise anyone. As early as their December 2007 meeting, the HALRB had trouble with the massing—the height, width and length of the buildings.

The HALRB never made any overtures to liking the scope of this project. It was always just “too big.” I think they could be convinced that something smaller could happen at that corner, but I don’t think that they would have ever liked what the developer, Georgetown Strategic Capital, was offering. I agree with them somewhat, too. I understand why they feel the buildings just were not right for that corner. Four-storeys of red brick and smallish rectangular windows look very institutional (read: prison-like), but that was what Georgetown Strategic felt was left to them.

That’s where I see Georgetown Strategic’s point. Although the board never showed any love for the plans, I never heard the board members say flat-out that they would not support four storeys on the buildings (recall that the plan was to raze the CVS, Glebe Market and El Paso buildings and replace them with two large buildings housing ground floor retail and three floors of apartments above).

It was as if the HALRB kept waiting for Georgetown Strategic to draw-up plans for significantly smaller buildings (something the developer says was economically unfeasible), while Georgetown Strategic kept hoping that the HALRB would learn to love a four-storey building if they could just find the right combination of design and materials. Neither was ever going to happen.

I think the HALRB was right that the buildings never really looked like "Buckingham" buildings--and I was not in love with the plans myself, but I see Georgetown Strategic's consternation.

The HALRB could have put the kaibosh on the fourth floor months ago when they first realized that the plans were not changing significantly and they weren't liking it.

Now the question is whether anyone (even Georgetown Strategic) will take another crack at it.

As always, you can scroll down to see all the recent stories, or simply click the links below (if the link doesn't work, scroll down to find the story, and email to tell me what's busted: heraldtrib@gmail.com --Steve Thurston).

Headlines from Earlier in the Week:

Arlington to Enter Lease with Telesis for BV3

Police Warn Arlingtonians of Scams

Letter: Ashton Heights' Bilich Endorses Pat Hope for 47th House of Delegates Race

Buckingham Shopping Center Redevelopment Dies in HALRB Hands

">Ethiopia Highlighted at Barrett Library Night

Labels: aim, BV3, halrb, redevelopment, tv

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 1:30 PM 0 comments

The Arlington County board is set to OK a lease with Telesis Corp., the redeveloper of Buckingham Village 3, at the board’s recessed meeting Tuesday Feb. 24. This paves the way for the county to buy the land and buildings of Village 3 from Paradigm Corp. and its partners, the current owners of the property. Closing date for the sale is March 19, capping a process that began in 2006.

Although the county manager’s report to the county board supports the plan, officials from Telesis still met at the Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board meeting on Wednesday to request a vote of support from the HALRB.

Wanting to follow the “Arlington Way” of getting as much community buy-in before the county board meeting, William Whitman, a Telesis vice president, said after the meeting that he wanted to know that historic changes were OK and to “secure their support.”

The request was granted, and the HALRB decided the best way to handle this was to write a letter to the county board, but the details of the letter took some time to figure out.

The HALRB wanted the letter to express general support for the direction the redevelopment was taking, without appearing to support any particular modification at this point.

Telesis is proposing to redevelop Village 3 in much the same way that AHC, Inc. redeveloped the Gates of Ballston; this makes it less risky for the HALRB to support the concept, people around the table said.

The project includes additions on the backs of buildings and using some of the basements to create new apartments or expand current ones. Telesis hopes to enclose breezeways on the property. A couple tot-lot playgrounds are planned, as well as a new, below-ground community room.

One proposal that came under a bit of fire Wednesday was the number and size of the additions. Five additions were approved months ago, and Telesis last month asked for four more. However, the new ones clogged the backyards, in the HALRB’s opinion, so Telesis asked this month only for two more, but larger, additions. The board wanted the shape of those to change.

Also at the meeting were people representing the disabled, who need affordable housing at a higher rate than other people, said Doris Ray, a member of the county’s Disability Advisory Commission.

“As you consider the historic and architectural features, please also consider that this is a project that will provide some significant number of affordable housing units,” Ms. Ray said. Most of Village 3 will be affordable for rent or sale.

“Affordable housing is very important, but the need for it to be accessible is more important,” she said.

Putting affordability and accessibility together in one project is tough, she admitted. She asked for ramps to the first floor, especially where there was only step to the stoop, lever door handles, and wider doorways where possible.

Board members were quick to say that they control only the outsides of buildings, but that they would encourage accessibility where possible.

The developers said they would look into it.

How the sale and resale works is this: Although the county will buy and own the property and buildings, Telesis will own the improvements to the buildings and will be able to rent the buildings and grounds from the county while they rent the units to tenants, said David Cristeal of the county’s planning division, in a series of interviews and emails.

“The county has to close on this property by March 20, period,” Mr. Cristeal said on Feb. 13. The cost is $34.5 million which will be paid for with a short term note from SunTrust bank and about $625,000 in AHIF funds, a tax-and-fee supported fund the county uses for affordable housing projects. Mr. Cristeal could not release the details of the note from SunTrust.

The lease for Telesis is 75 years, with the option for a five year extension. The details of this lease were still being worked out and were unavailable for print, as well.

The plan is that some of the 140 apartments would be converted into tenant-owned units, either a condominium or a co-op. If that happens, the county would have to sell the land and the buildings, Mr. Cristeal said.

The law prohibits Arlington from acting as a landlord for housing. Although the county’s policy has encouraged low-income housing, its only power to make that happen has been these sorts of deals. If the county were to create a housing authority, this deal would possibly be subject to change, Mr. Cristeal said.

Last November, voters handily struck down a referendum creating a housing authority with two-thirds of the vote going against it. About 70 percent of Buckinghamsters and Arlington Foresters voted against it while Ashton Heightsans voted against it 3 to 1.

Under a memorandum of understanding agreed to by the county and Paradigm in July 2006, while Buckingham Villages 1 and 2 have begun redevelopment, Village 3 was placed under the county's historic protection and would be sold to the county for resale to another developer.

Additions, Basement Apartments and "Roosevelt Room" proposed for Village 3 (Feb. 2, 2009)

Telesis' Plans for BV3 Called "Very Responsive" (Nov. 21, 2008).

Labels: buckingham villages, BV3, halrb, telesis

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 11:31 AM 0 comments

(The HALRB has a strong mandate from the county government, as I heard a member say years ago, “We don’t approve concepts, we approve specifics.” If a company cannot get the details past the HALRB, the project does not happen. For a number of reasons, I was not on hand for the full meeting; if tempers flared, I missed it. –ST.)

Six breezeways in the buildings—those patio spaces conjoining two buildings—will be walled-in and the space there used for the sunrooms in the apartments. Some of the breezeways are only accessible by crawling through windows, Telesis reported. This was a case of the HALRB liking the idea of making the spaces more useable but not liking the bead-board look of the exteriors.

The company is asking to build a total of nine “bump-outs,” additions off the backs of the buildings that would change about 20 two-bedroom apartments into three-bedroom apartments.

They are looking to put stand-alone apartments in some basements as well as create a downstairs space attached to apartments above them. The plans include two tot-lot playgrounds, but the swimming pool, part of an earlier plan, is gone.

The following are the latest drawings of potential redevelopment at the N. Glebe Road and N. Pershing Drive intersection. The photos are an attempt to capture the same angle and distance as the drawings to give viewers a clear sense of what might come. They are not exactly the same, as that is probably not possible.

The drawings were distributed at last night's Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board meeting. Bob Moore, of Georgetown Strategic Capital (the potential developer of the site) and Scott Matties, of Cunningham Quill Architects, were on hand to present these latest ideas and take questions.

The discussion at the HALRB meeting was congenial, as both sides (the board and the developer) agreed that the buildings are moving in the right direction. The architect is going to try to lessen the abrupt change in height from the two storey buildings of the Gates of Ballston apartments to the planned buildings on the corner (see the first comparison, below, to get a sense of the difference in heights).

The board asked the developer to start thinking about the materials they would use on the outside of the large buildings, as well.

"That will tell us if the clothing will help hide the girth," said Board Chair Nancy Iacomini.

"Quote of the night," responded Bob Moore, during much laughter.

The basic plan with the property is to remove three commercial buildings from the west side of the N. Glebe Road and N. Pershing Drive intersection (the CVS, El Paso, and Glebe Market buildings). They would be replaced with two buildings with street-level retail and three floors of apartments above.

Mr. Moore also said that his company plans to paint the buildings east of Glebe Road and to find ways to put in greenery on that side (the Cassianna Spa side) of the street.

Please find a list of stories below the illustrations.

The HALRB meets on Dec. 19. The Design Review Committee, which cancelled its meeting last week due to inclement weather, will pick up the item again at its Jan. 2 meeting.

Sorry for the confusion.

Last Week's Coverage of Plans

DRC to Consider Glebe/Pershing Redevelopment (Sept. 2007)

HALRB's Web Site

HALRB's Meetings, Agendas, Minutes 2007

Labels: DRC, halrb, redevelopment

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 12:29 PM 0 comments

“The artwork for [this] project will be the bus shelters that our arts work program designed,” said Angela Adams in a voice mail last month. She works in the Arlington County Public Arts Program. The word “Open” will be etched into the glass in various languages. Bus shelters in other neighborhoods have similar etchings.

When first reported here in June that the work of sculptor Judy Sutton Moore had been cancelled, Lois Athey, who sat on the original committee that picked Sutton Moore, said the story was the first she heard of the cancellation. Ms. Athey is a civic activist who works with tenants in Buckingham Village and the Gates of Ballston.

Pat Hope, the Buckingham Community Civic Association president, called the news of the lost art a “slap in the face.”

County staff involved in this discussion said the main problem with the artwork was its size and style for the historic corner. The Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board, which regulates changes to the corner, largely killed the idea, officials have said.

However, Michael Leventhal, a historic affairs coordinator for the county, could not find the minutes from the particular HALRB meeting in which the art was discussed and dropped. Therefore, no one could say for sure whether people from Buckingham were on hand to discuss the decision.

“The BCCA was never consulted and there was no attempt to compromise the proposal to make it acceptable to HALRB,” Mr. Hope wrote in an email last month.

The project has been more than seven years in the making and has become “the project from hell” said Mr. Leventhal during an interview in September. Others have called it by similar names.

Only last month could the county finally hire a contractor, pledging over $800,000 if needed, to begin the process of redeveloping the gutters, sidewalks and crosswalks at the intersection. Other improvements, requiring other contracts, include more trees, fancier light posts and the bus shelters. In the past year, the utility wires have been moved underground.

Drivers should expect to see signs on Glebe Road announcing the road work soon, and the construction can begin two weeks after the signs go up, William “Bill” Roberts, the county’s project manager, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

This project has a long, tortured history, with too many cooks in the kitchen. VDOT controls the Glebe right-of-way, and therefore can veto decisions on lane widths, turn lanes and signals on the corner. (The rule about the signs going up for two weeks before work begins is VDOT’s rule, Mr. Roberts said.)

Although Jenco Group, of Arlington, owns much of the property on the corner, there are other owners and investment partners all who needed to sign easements to allow the work to go forward. Not all were eager to sign, Mr. Roberts has said in the past.

The plans themselves had to go through public review at the start, and the HALRB can control what is seen on the landscape.

When the HALRB had misgivings about the art, it became a layer of frustration that county staff did not want to deal with both Mr. Roberts and Mr. Leventhal have said.

As well, Mr. Roberts and Mr. Leventhal said the artist had gotten sick. For her part Ms. Sutton Moore could not remember ever being sick.

“I tell you what,” she said with recollection yesterday, “I did have surgery during that period of time, but that’s like a month, maybe six weeks, of recovery.” Since then, she has finished many projects, she said.

Mr. Leventhal, who sat on the committee that chose Ms. Sutton Moore, said that planning was a bit nonsequential in order—they had art before they knew what the corner would look like. It was the artist’s ideas for the corner that made the county realize they would need to underground the utility wires, he said.

“She really had the most interesting stuff,” Mr. Leventhal said. “She just didn’t do the same thing several different times.” He said Ms. Sutton Moore looked to the neighborhood and found inspiration in the immigrant experience.

In a profile in the Buckingham Independent News, the predecessor of the HeraldTrib, Ms. Sutton Moore talked about conducting research for projects like this, studying the architecture and talking with the neighbors. The story was also naively upbeat with an expected completion by the end of the summer of 2003.

Her plans included humanistic figures in boats and other modes of transportation, people who were arriving here, immigrants. Yet it was modern, and stainless steel with bronze, geometric. Not historic. Her figures—not quite “people”—often look similar to stainless steel bowling pins.

Ms. Sutton Moore said in an interview yesterday, “All I know is that the design was approved by the people who lived in the neighborhood. They gave their support to it....And the public art committee approved of it.” She said she had heard the project hit roadblocks, but never really understood why it died. “I was very disappointed that the Arlington project fell through,” she added later.

Her sculptures, are often large, 20 feet tall or more.

“Was any of the sculpture going to fit on the corner?” Mr. Leventhal said people asked.

The idea of the large sculptures appealed to the committee when they chose Ms. Sutton Moore’s work, Mr. Leventhal said. “I don’t know if we’d do it again that way…at the time it was great.”

In a voice mail last month, Ms. Adams said, “Our Research shows that we paid Judy Sutton Moore just over $1,000 to do design work in 2002 for the Buckingham four corners project.”

Mr. Roberts said he has been in contact with Mr. Hope about bringing more art back to the four corners.

In his email, the civic association’s Mr. Hope wrote, “My effort will be focused on trying to come up with something that would be distinctly Buckingham and acceptable to HALRB. It suddenly has become our project, but I think we can do it.”

Until then, however, the bus shelters are planned.

“I think the bus shelters will be a beautiful addition to the intersection,” Ms. Adams said in an interview yesterday.

Labels: art, halrb, pershing, redevelopment, renovation

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 9:53 PM 1 comments