Things I Think Are Wrong About the City of Richmond Proposal to Buy the GRTC Bus Barn Site - Part I

I wanted to write something detailed and brilliant, but I'm under the gun and don't want to completely drop the ball on this topic.  So, rather than the well-reasoned and convincing analysis I was going to prepare, you get.....BULLET POINTS!

Why I think the idea of the City of Richmond and RRHA buying the GRTC bus barn site in a private deal is a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea:

• Last time I checked, GRTC was a quasi-governmental entity.  So, doesn't any sale of that parcel have to be an open market sale, to ensure that the transaction is arm's length and that GRTC receives fair market value?
• The City isn't a real estate developer.
• When the City has tried to be a real estate developer, they've done a terrible job, IMHO. 
• The City and RRHA sure seem pretty tight lipped about the ultimate plans - or even the conceptual plans, for that matter - for the site.  That doesn't inspire confidence, at least not for me.
• I am pretty confident that the neighborhood associations and the constituents could bring enough political pressure to bear on a private developer to ensure a good end result, that would make most people happy.
• I have NO confidence that the City could or would develop the property in an appropriate manner. 
• RRHA's involvement means affordable housing.  Now, if we could agree on what affordable housing is, that would be the first step.  And if I thought the City and/or RRHA could or would do an appropriate and aesthetically pleasing development with an affordable housing component, that would be another.  But if "affordable housing" means ugly buildings with cheap building materials and cruddy faux Victorian elements, I'm out. 
• Let's be realistic.  Using that site exclusively for affordable housing is not the highest and best use of the property and doesn't make economic sense.
• Good design doesn't have to be expensive.  Affordable housing doesn't have to be ugly.  Unfortunately, most of the time, it is.  I think ugly there would be very unfortunate.
• AGAIN, the City isn't a real estate developer.  Why are they trying to play one on TV?

All of this is just one woman's personal opinion.  I am all for Mayor Jones' "development by design, not default" philosophy.  But the City and RRHA should stick to their knitting.  Influence the development of the parcel through appropriate governmental tools, like zoning, proffers, exerting political influence.  Hold a series of public meetings for the neighborhood associations, local businesses, residents, and any other interested parties and ask what THEY want to see on that parcel.  Communicate with the community about what the City wants there, and why.  Come up with the ideal, and then let's see if we can find someone to implement it.  But don't try to play developer. 

Them's my thoughts.  That, and $.25, won't get you a cup of coffee.

Comments

[Jenny]

Great post. Especially the part about using existing government tools and holding almost a master plan like set of meetings without it taking two years. I read Hills and Heights account of the town meeting last night and sounded like Jones didn't have a clue as to how to answer most of the questions. Last thing we need is a blind dive into this and screw it up beyond repair.