To the Editor:
Vernon Miles of the Alexandria Gazette Packet wrote a significant article about redevelopment in Old Town. The article covered several areas. My letter will focus on the seven acres of the approved Waterfront Plan and Old Town. As indicated, Old Town drives tourism and its attendant revenue generators for the shops and restaurants along King Street. Important is that it is the commercial areas of Old Town, not the residential areas, that are the “golden goose” that is referred to in the article. The commercial areas of Old Town Alexandria lead to the Potomac River, with its views of Washington D.C. It is the location that drives tourism to Old Town. There are buildings on King Street from many eras: Original census to recently built structures.
A portion of the article focused on opposition to the redevelopment of the Alexandria waterfront. The plan includes replacing the empty warehouses with two new boutique hotels and additional residential units, additional and upgraded parks, a continuous walkway on the Potomac and improved flood control. This development has created two camps that have significantly different views. On one hand are people that support the city’s Waterfront Small Area Plan which was approved by citizens appointed to the Planning Committee, the Board of Architectural Review and our elected officials. On the other is a group of Old Town citizens opposed to the plan and who have continually fought and lost.
Related groups have taken their case all the way to the Virginia Supreme Court and lost. It is all of the citizens of Alexandria that are suffering from the delay and forced to pay for the defense. We do not need a war of Old Town residents against the rest of the city. Because of this group’s extreme and loud opposition to the Waterfront plan many people in the city get the impression that Old Town residents prefer Old Town to be a gated community.
There are many residents of Old Town and Alexandria who are in favor of the Waterfront Plan seeing it as a great enhancement to the waterfront, again eliminating unsightly warehouses and the related rat control boxes. Many Alexandrians want to protect our existing historical buildings. And like many cities are in favor of complimentary development, not fake colonial. These voices need to be heard.
The city is cleared and in the position to implement the Waterfront plan. But the opponents to the plan continue to be obstructionist. The cost to the city and to the development continues. As an example on Sept. 12 there is a case to prevent the destruction of an unsightly, small, empty, concrete brick building on the Strand, a building with no historical value from being razed. I encourage all readers to see the
building before it is razed, to have the first-hand experience of how silly the opposition can be.
Many Alexandrians feel that the new architecture will bring much more to Alexandria than we have ever had before and believe that the city and taxpayers will benefit from an open waterfront. Residents and tourist will visit the waterfront. Tourists will provide new tax revenue that will support the entire city.
Lynn Hampton
Alexandria