kensington scare-ace

halloween wasn't the only scary thing last week - the proposed kensington terrace mixed-use project got a frightful reception from a vocal minority in attendance at the kensington community church on thursday. located on adams avenue from marlborough to edgeware, it will replace an overpriced gas station and two boarded-up homes fronting adams, along with some property behind it. it's a fairly large (three story) project for the neighborhood, with lots of retail space planned and the underground parking it requires. needless to say, a lot of folks are up in arms about it and they vented their opinions at the forum with the developer, allard jansen.

prior to the meeting, a letter in opposition to aspects of the current project proposal was circulated around the neighborhood. it was signed by several residents who live on edgeware near the project. i understand their concerns, and if i lived adjacent to the project my name might have been on that letter too. in my opinion however, when you purchase property adjacent to a commercial area, the homeowner should recognize that this type of project is a possibility. while one of their main concerns is that the project seeks a height variance of 7 feet above the 30 foot standard, they did not address the fact that part of this property is zoned for 50 feet. the variance is a result of the developer's consideration of not including a towering structure on part of the property, evening out the vertical distribution of the project.

of course, the opposition letter did not mention that aspect, just how the variance resulted in a project that did not belong in kensington. but then the letter was hardly truthful. it claimed that all parking along adams avenue would be eliminated, and that the project would bring an additional 2400+ car trips to kensington daily. yet there is no plan to remove parking, just a re-striping of adams to include a turning lane, and the actual number of additional car trips is around 1400, according to my partner jay who was at the meeting.

again, i can understand local residents' opposition to aspects of the proposal, but when you distribute a letter that includes outright lies to scare residents into opposition, it doesn't help your cause. in fact, it makes me wonder if they oppose any development at all at this location, and would prefer for this stretch to stay as dumpy as it is now. but i'll give them the benefit of the doubt - maybe they were just using halloween week to try and put a good scare into all of us.

anyway, the meeting had good value for amusing quotes from the large neighborhood turnout. they include (i'm paraphrasing from jay's memory):

- "i'm worried that the project will bring in outsiders. you see them at starbucks and you know they don't live here. can you enforce the (no loitering rule) on these people? they are ruining the neighborhood by being there."

- "what kind of retail are you going to bring in, chuck e. cheese?"

- "i'm afraid of something like wal-mart coming in".

and basically, too tall, too dense, too big for the neighborhood.

i love the first quote - let's just cut right to what she's saying - keep those dirty eritrean cab drivers out of my neighborhood! um, last time i checked, there are no gates on this neighborhood. anyone can come here that wants to, and if they like to hang out in a cafe for hours because that's what they do in their country of origin, so be it.

the wal-mart and chuck e. cheese lines are just ridiculous. how are you going to fit a freaking wal-mart into that space?! and i think the any sensible developer would try to attract retail that appeals to the neighborhood, like a small market, not a god-awful chain restaurant (unless you have small children, when it's a lifesaver).

it was encouraging that several people who supported the project turned out, including an older fellow who said he'd lived in the neighborhood for 40 years, saw how people were fixing up the homes in what had been a deteriorating area, and had hoped for this kind of project. i agree and think that this can be a positive resource that will reduce local residents' number of car trips by offering more neighborhood services. more walking, less driving for us has many benefits. and we should not oppose increased density along main thoroughfares like adams that have bus lines (and maybe a streetcar someday?).

still, it's sobering to see the lily-white turnout, and veiled racist comments about outsiders coming in. i like to think kensington is a hip neighborhood, but there's still lots of folks here who fear those who are different than them coming into the area, and oppose meaningful change that will make this happen.

finally, the meeting had a weird cameo by none other than city attorney mike aguirre, who dashed in and interrupted the meeting to state his opposition to the project. he was laughed out of the room after someone told him, "there's no cameras here mike, so there's no reason for you to be here!"

let's hope the developer is willing to make reasonable accomodations to the project and we can move forward on an exciting addition to the neighborhood. i'll post some renderings once they're available, but i like the look of other projects from this developer.