The Buckingham Herald Tribblog

Right now, the rules say no.

Mr. Bonilla is a “rod-man” for the Miller-Long construction company, helping place the steel reinforcement bar in the huge columns that keep high-rises vertical. In that job, he makes about $25 per hour, up near $50,000 a year. And that’s just not enough according to the current rules that county staff, Telesis Corporation, and that company’s management partners are considering for home ownership in the condominium.

The current rules say that the total income of residents in the unit must be 60 to 80 percent of the Area Median Income. The AMI is set by the federal department of Housing and Urban Development. Mr. Bonilla would need to make about $61,000 a year to qualify.

Still, there is some hope.

The county board OKed an affordable housing program for Buckingham Village 3 at its meeting Tuesday night. It opens the process of creating a 48-unit condominium in five buildings along N. Pershing Drive between N. George Mason Drive and N. Thomas Street. However, the board left open many of the details of what the condominium finances would look like and who would be able to buy.

“I think I can qualify,” Mr. Bonilla said from a chair in his living room one recent afternoon. He said he has a high credit rating and savings. Plus, the rules dictate the total household income, not one person’s. Perhaps a relative of his would be interested in sharing the mortgage and sleeping in one of the rooms.

His daughters are growing older. Joana is 10 months (and already walking), and Eugenia will turn five in October and will go to the pre-school program at K.W. Barrett Elementary School this fall. It might take a couple years before the units are ready for sale.

“We don’t know when this is coming, so my wife could work too,” in time to qualify, he said. His wife, Maria Sanchez, has been staying home with their children.

Lois Athey and others at the county board meeting urged the board to consider lowering the standard for owner-qualifications. She is a long-time representative of BU-GATA, a tenants’ association in the neighborhood.

“Some of these people will qualify with good credit scores and savings…you’d be surprised,” she told the board.

The question of what income level to serve was discussed at length in the Buckingham Village 3 Working Group, a group set up at the direction of Ron Carlee, the county manager. It is a group of all the stakeholders involved including Telesis Corporation (the new owners of the Village 3 complex), tenants, county staff and others.

“We didn’t come to a complete consensus” on that issue, said Reshma Holla, an assistant project manager with Telesis. Her company will develop and manage the property with the National Housing Trust and other partners.

County staff, she said, got nervous at the level of subsidy when the income level dropped. Currently, the county subsidy is expected to be about $140,000 per unit. If the subsidy has to increase in order to help people at the lower income level, the price rises to about $200,000, she said.

“Ultimately that means we’d be asking for more county subsidy,” she said, adding that county staff just wasn’t comfortable with that number.

It is not just the subsidy but the idea that this level of help has not been done in the county for homeownership before.

“The 60 to 80 percent [of AMI] is consistent with what we’ve done elsewhere,” said David Cristeal, a lead county planner on the project. It is a “nuanced answer” but the county has to be careful to avoid a precedent it cannot keep.

But there still is the possibility that the 50 percent AMI level can be reached, Ms. Holla said.

“The goal is we’d still like to reach that lower income level,” she said. They will be looking to other sources, maybe private sources, for the money.

At the board meeting Tuesday night, Jose Castellon, an 18-year Village 3 resident, told the board to put the emphasis on “a variety of income ranges.”

After the meeting he said, “I’m happy” that the board passed the affordable housing plan. But he still hopes to be able to buy.

“I got good credit,” he said, adding later, “I don’t want to go away.”

He has two children who will be in high school next year. “I don’t want to pull my kids out of school.”

In Mr. Bonilla’s living room, he said he likes the access to Metro, the Glebe Market, the good schools.

“I like the neighborhood. It’s a very good neighborhood,” he said. If he can’t buy, he said he would not move away, but would most likely rent a two-bedroom unit. His daughters can share a room.

“They’re two girls, they can live in one bedroom,” he said.

But would he resent not being able to buy, despite his work on the Buckingham Village 3 working group?

“I wouldn’t be disillusioned because someone from my community would be getting the benefits,” he said.

Editor’s Note: Lois Athey, a long-time activist with BU-GATA, the tenants’ association in the neighborhood, translated the interview with Mr. Bonilla in his living room. --ST

Labels: buckingham villages, BV3, redevelopment, telesis

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 9:44 AM 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

Arlington’s Historical Affairs and Landmarks Review Board will take another peak at a couple Buckingham projects this Wednesday.

Georgetown Strategic Capital faced serious criticisms at the December HALRB meeting. They hope to raze the CVS and Glebe Market buildings and replace them with four-storey, mixed use buildings.

The height of the building, the set-back from the road, the amount of available parking and the placement of landscaping all came under fire. At that time, Georgetown Strategic said the restraints on the project were making it less economically viable.

Telesis Corporation, the company that has won the right to redevelop Buckingham Village 3, will present its latest plans. Telesis hopes to keep the buildings in tact, but wishes to add additions to some, basement living spaces in others and a community center in an unused room underground. Read about the January meeting here.

Both groups have appeared before the HALRB and its sub-committee, the Design Review Committee in the past.

The meeting is Wednesday, Feb. 18, 7:30p.m., but the discussion on Buckingham issues is scheduled for just after 8p.m. Anyone who wants to speak on these, or any, issues must sign-up at the start of the meeting.

The Arlington County Board is set to take up some other issues regarding Village 3 next week. More later.

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:

The U.S. Census Needs Help from Arlington Foresters

Police Notes.

Labels: georgetown strategic, telesis

// posted by Steve Thurston @ 2:51 PM 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.