Granados Column: Everywhere I go . . . more of the same
Published: June 28, 2009
When I first moved to Raleigh, N.C., it was nothing but trees and concrete roads. There were few shopping centers and fewer stores.
The big deal for me was the rickety wood gas station down the street that sold candy cigarettes.
As the population of Raleigh boomed, that corner gas station was demolished to make way for a more modern gasoline-dispensing facility, and all those trees I told you about were reduced to pulp in
order to accommodate a slew of identical shopping centers.
I grew older and saw my home city morph homogeneously before my eyes; I began to wonder if anybody was in charge of the mess.
When I drove up to Woodbridge a few years ago to interview at the Potomac News, I was struck by how similar to home the community felt. I rolled off Interstate 95 and . . . same signs, same stores,
same everything.
In the time since I moved and began work in this area, I have gained a greater understanding for developments, how they spring up and why.
Different jurisdictions have different motivations for how they shape development.
Take Manassas Park, for example. For as long as I’ve been here — and long before that — the burden of funding the city has rested on residents. There are simply more residents than there are
businesses, so residential real estate taxes are the main source of tax dollars. The city has strived to bring in more businesses so that the distribution of taxes can broaden and the concentrated
pressure on residents can weaken. This need to diversify the tax burden shapes much of the development in Manassas Park.
In Manassas, money isn’t always the prime concern.
Recently, news broke that the Harris Teeter originally slated to open in Manassas in July has been delayed until . . . God knows when.
Hastings Marketplace, the development that Harris Teeter is to anchor, was a rezoning that caused much consternation for some city residents and a great deal of accommodation and contortion from the
developer. And, after all that trouble and time taken to convince people to love the idea of this mixed-use development — which was supposed to combine residential with commercial property —the
markets tanked and the future of the property has become less than totally certain.
Part of the city’s motive in the case of Hastings Marketplace was more transformative than anything else. The council wanted to turn sleepy little Manassas into an area more fitting of the
title, “Washington, D.C., suburb.” Council members had a definite vision they were hoping to shape. Unfortunately, luck has as much to do with successful development as planning. And in this case, the
city’s luck turned bad — along with the rest of the country’s.
And then we have the county where current Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart once ran on a platform of limited development. Commercial growth was getting out of hand in the county
and he vowed to stop it. Of course, he didn’t really have to — the economy eventually took care of that — but evidently county residents at the time were feeling a sentiment similar to the distaste I had
felt for the willy-nilly concrete explosion of Raleigh.
So, there we see the result of mostly-unchecked expansion — rebellion.
Reviewing Manassas, Manassas Park and Prince William County, I have come to the conclusion that the patterns of development are subject to many of the same chaotic impulses that fuel much of the
change in the world — money, a desire for progress, a desire for peace of mind and chance.
Those conclusions don’t do much for me though. When I look out my car window, I just see more of the same.
Alex Granados, committed to surviving the end times by hiding out in the forest, is the editorial page editor for the News & Messenger. He can be reached by e-mail at
, phone
at 703-878-8069 or in his doomsday bunker—just clap twice and gobble like a turkey. He’ll be right with you.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Over a number of years, developers
have had such a “stronghold” in
Prince William County. It is ironic
that BOCS recently suggested that
staff go to Charlottesville to see
what they have done to keep their
area attractive. Where has foresight
been for so long on the part of staff
AND leadership to have not considered
long term affects of over-saturation
so fast, rather than to “beautify”
all along. Developers have gone with
“their money” and residential taxpayers
are “left with the bill”.
Alex,
What you have observed has been more or less the experience of my life, having been raised in California, living overseas and in NC, now in Northern VA. The inner cities are built, then start decaying as new structures spread in an intermittent manner on the outskirts, and then people rediscover the old inner city and start gentrification. A cycle. All ugly, all expensive, all wasteful. I noticed that European cities generally do not follow this pattern. It is rare, there, to see an empty lot in an inner city for long. European cities of small-to-medium size tend to have compact urban areas and then country, with less urban sprawl. A lot of this has to do with taxation: some countries tax unimproved land value higher, thus discouraging holding land for nonproductive speculation. The name of the game here is to hold land that is unimproved or that contains decaying structures in the hopes of cashing in later when the demographic pressure mounts. How else to explain SE DC, which is valuable land kept in a slum state by speculators wanting enormous profits for doing what? The history of great American fortunes always seems to come around to land speculation and the manipulation of taxes, availability, zoning, public projects, etc. People who improve their property (homeowners, for example) pay the highest taxes. In any event, I agree with the situation that you lament


Advertisement