Town Green Water Leak Update

Wow, did this site force her move?

Oh come on...you don't think Town Council and Town Staff read this site?!... Everyday! The bet here is that it will not be turned back on until it is fixed. If they turn it on unfixed, time to go video the dang thing. Mayberry RFD!

Hey, you are giving Mayberry RFD a bad name. It's not as if they have cave men living in NC. Here in Vienna, we have our very own Maudasaurus! and that's cave-man enough for me.

That's great. A very expensive water feature that will not have water to show, and for what will probably be months to come.

Nice for the Town Brown. Whose design flaw was this anyway? Why didn't they just put up a nice small town looking water fountain with water going up and back down in a traditional pool? Now, that would have been nicer and would not have wasted all the millions of gallons of water this table top overflowing toilet bowl like feature the town rammed down our pocket books.

I don't like it, and I don't like Maud or Jane for their insistence that we had no say in this process. Nice pair of no-nothings, if you ask me.

I can see people saying a traditional fountain could be dangerous for small children.

But, most certainly putting the water feature next to Maple Avenue isn't dangerous at all.

what a town square should look like:

http://www.ushistory.org/tour/gifs/washingtonsquarepark.jpg

Vienna's Town Green was the push of one person - Maud. She has the power and control and she wanted it. But she is a political animal, not an achiever. An achiever would have made sure the Town Green was perfect. A politician, like Maud, just wants to seem like she is an achiever to the public. That is why the Town Green is a bust. Maud knows how to spend other people's money, but she never really cared to make it perfect. Most likely, she doesn't have the skill or energy to make it perfect. And let's face it, everyone else surrounding this project was just getting paid.

It's quite frustrating to see that Merrifield Garden Center has such a pretty "classic" looking fountain out front of their store and I'm sure it did not cost even 1/10th of the Vienna "fountain."

Did anyone think of a "water feature" like the town chose when you heard one would be featured? It's the ugliest fountain around. I guess I was thinking something like Reston Town Center - their fountains are great.

Wow - Vienna could have taken a cue from Savannah, too:

http://www.officialsavannahguide.com/article_8.shtml

Who is in charge of these flags at the Town Green? I drove by there today and the VA flag and other flag are at half mast while the American flag is not. It's very disrespectful but not surprising I suppose.

here's a simple, pleasant fountain--at Clarendon Commons (which Maude thinks is just awful). I'll bet it didn't cost much either.
http://www.myerton.com/images/Image_Area_MarketCommon01.gif

Oh Clarendon-that's the place that Maud says people do not go to!

And the trees around the Clarendon Commons are GREEN. Imagine that.

Water back on tonight. Sidewalk soaked as usual. Trees dead. Go Maud!

no one goes there because it's too crowded. at least Vienna's town green doesn't have that problem.

No taste!

Anne: That's it! I assumed that Vienna was putting in a classic looking fountain like that. What they chose is horrible looking.

I was reading on the Project for Public Spaces (PPS) website - interesting what they say makes a good/bad town square - Vienna hits every "bad" mark.

A critique of Pershing Square in LA reminded me of Vienna:

Public transportation connections are available around the park, and a great deal of daytime traffic swirls about it. Most people use it as a pathway to somewhere else and they do not linger there for very long.

It seems to provide little comfort. At its best, it is ugly and dingy, despite its makeover more than 10 years ago.

There are often lots of activities that draw people into the park, but it seems to do little good. Once the activity or event is over, people scatter, fearing they may be left alone.

The square is used as a pathway to somewhere else. A small group uses the area, but few view it as the social spot many city leaders want it to be.

vienna mommy,
yes! the Project for Public Spaces is a great group (www.pps.org). They recently reissued the classic book by William Whyte called "the Social Life of Small Urban Spaces." It lays out the recipe for creating a great public park. A must-read for anyone trying to understand urban space planning.

Vienna Mommy/Anne Smith,
I looked on the website you listed (which I've been to before) and looked under the Ten principles of Public Squares and based on this list, I feel that the Vienna Town Green meets all these except #7 which relates to what is built around the green. To break this down, the Vienna green creates
1) a nice image for the town (the community center is too far off Main Street to do this effectively). The town green is also very centrally located within the town,
2) has attractions in it - i.e. historic buildings and a fountain (although I would agree more active rec. use would be nice to have too esp. for kids),
3) has amenities in it -i.e. seating, trash, and bathrooms,
4)allows for flexible design, especially when events are scheduled
5) allows for seasonal things such as summer concerts, egg roll, etc.
6)has great vehicular and pedestrian access (Vienna is very lucky to have this green near an industrial area that has a lot of parking available on the weekends and evenings
7) The green does not meet this yet. It does not really have much around it or an "Outer Square" as the principles say which I've identified as the main problem with the green, although based on this website there are plans to do so (and people on this website seem to be against it),
8)The comprehensive plan for Church Street, Main Street, sidewalks, and the bike path all help draw people from the town to the green,
9) and 10)The green is managed and funded well through the local government and now hopefully with the Friends of the Town Green. Another great thing with this square is that it is public which allows for greater freedom of expression/speech on public land. Keep in mind also that greens develop over time and this one is less than 1 year old.
This is the website I used to look up the priciples of a good square. Is this the one you were looking at? http://www.pps.org/parks_plazas_squares/info/parks_plazas_squares_articles/squares_principles.

Principle #7 concludes: "A square surrounded by lanes of fast-moving traffic will be cut off from pedestrians and deprived of its most essential element: people." It sounds like TC chose the wrong location. Moreover, there is still the question of spending priorities (e.g., sidewalks versus Town Green).

I understand there are issues of spending priorities where the town should have had more input, but in answer to your analysis, the town green is hardly surrounded by fast-moving traffic. Traffic is usually slow on 123, is only 2 lanes with some parallel parking on two sides, and has a one way street on the other side. Yes, they should have put some more buffering between the square and the road, but that is a design feature, not a location issue. To me if the buildings immediately surrounding the green are developed nicely, it will meet all the features of a great town square. I am curious what the preferred location of a town green was verses the site they chose? The site they picked is near municipal land, in the center of town, adjacent to other green area (i.e. the historic buildings) which enable the entire site to have more flexibility and connects Church to Maple, is close to the bike path, is near the community center and other municipal buildings, near Park St. which is the main southern connector road into the center of town. There may be other sites in town that are equally as good, but personally I don't think they are superior. I also am of the opinion that a town square does not have to all be "green". I would almost have preferred less green and more varied amenities such as a pavillion, playground, etc. verses green space. What are other's opinion on the green area verses amenities?

Except for absolute gridlock during the two rush hours, the traffic does speed by the green rather fast (between 30-45MPH).

My opinion is that if the green was so successful, it wouldn't be sitting idle as it does nearly 24 hours a day. You have to look to find anyone using the green outside of the "scheduled" activity times which are only 2-3x per week.

Nearly everyone in Vienna has a nice backyard which to sit in and relax. I would rather sit in my own private green space than listen to the noise of Maple Avenue. Plus, I can have a beer.

That's great you enjoy your backyard, but others of us in the town like public spaces such as the Vienna Town Green. It's a great place to meet up with someone for an event. It is less than 6 months old, so I think giving it a few years to allow development is needed before judging whether it's successful or not. I agree more redevelopment is needed around the green, but it doesn't take that much to be successful and Church St. is already re-developing. A lot of towns in New England have town greens that are very successful and right nearby there is a great example in Manassas at the Harris Pavilion (www.harrispavilion.com). There are only two visible outdoor restaurants there, one of which is Foster's Grille, and they are separated by the train tracks similarly to the way the bike trail separates the town green (although their view of the square is not impacted by plants). The square also benefits from having a senior center with ground floor retail right down the street.

Keely, my extensive discussion of your post unfortunately got lost. The key words were: Town Green, Chanps-Elysee, Maple Avenue, Abbotfsford Drive, commercial zoning replacement.

A

Not sure what your key words meant. If you get a chance, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say if you get a chance to re-write your comment. Thanks.

Am I supposed to care what happens in New England, Maud, er, Keely?

I've been told on this website by posters opposing development along Maple that they liked Vienna because it was a bastion of single family homes with beautiful backyards but now I'm told we need to leave them to sit at the Town Green. And, without a beer.

This is all a stab in the dark but I'm guessing that "A" is talking about the Abbotsford Bypass which the town blocked 40 years ago and keeps all traffic stuck on Maple. The fact that Maple Avenue will never even be .001% of what Champs-Elysee is and nothing will even have a chance to get better until we rezone all of our commercial corridor to allow true redevelopment.

To keep talking about the town green which represents 18,699 sq feet of Vienna is spinning wheels. If we rezoned and redeveloped, our entire town could be scattered with greens, shops & lovely stuff.

Last I checked, seven people stand in Vienna's way. No one on TC wants to do Vienna right. They just want their own little political fiefdom to feel important due to other inadequacies in their lives.

Vienna Mommy,
I agree. The town would benefit with a form based code in the commercial corridor. I also agree that the town green is small enough to not warrant complaints about taking away commercial land. The municipal spending on land in Vienna isn't anywhere near the amount that has gone towards the Fairfax Government Center. If done right, the town green and re-zoning could generate lots of nice shops, but as you say the town needs to be proactive to do Vienna right.

If we just wanted to enjoy our backyard, we would not have bought in the town of Vienna, but instead right outside the limits. We enjoy our backyard, but also enjoy being in a town community, near well kept community spaces with planned events, and a central business district. I don't know why else people want to pay extra taxes. From another posting, someone wanted to open up a pub, so maybe you'll be able to drink your beer near the town green someday.

The town would benefit with a form based code in the commercial corridor. I also agree that the town green is small enough to not warrant complaints about taking away commercial land. The municipal spending on land in Vienna isn't anywhere near the amount that has gone towards the Fairfax Government Center. If done right, the town green and re-zoning could generate lots of nice shops, but as you say the town needs to be proactive to do Vienna right.

There is NO plan or action moving toward form based code. Maud killed it.

The taking away of this particular piece of commercial land when all the analysis is done (lost revenue, opportunity cost of the money spent), will exceed $10 million dollars. The Fairfax County government is a multi-billion dollar enterprise with a budget exceeding the budget of several States! What does that have to do with Vienna?? This expenditure for Vienna was huge. So should we have spent 10M on a park that has been barely used in the last 6 months versus installing new sidewalks and easing congestion on Maple Avenue?

It's a matter of priorities. And once you get past the priorities issue, let's stop pretending that the current Vienna government is moving toward a pedestrian friendly down town with nice shops and restaurants...they are NOT. They are on the record for killing it all. ANYTHING Maudasaurus or Jane say about the redevelopment of Maple Avenue is BS to make some citizens think they are actually doing something. They are not.

HV,
The town green is already built so I don't understand what benefit it does to complain about it. I believe it can be an asset to the town and I don't agree with you money figures. If the redevelopment is done right, they will easily recoup the tax dollars of a site less than 1/2 ac.
I would be happy voting for whoever will promote updating the downtown of Vienna, especially around the new town green to make it a success. Unfortunately you tell me the current town govt. is against form based codes and you are against the anything to do with the town green. Guess I'll have to wait for someone new to come along.

By your math, the cost of the town green is infinite, since it "costs" lost commercial tax revenues forever. You clearly are a Maudite if you stop exaggerating the cost once you get to $10M.

Fortunately, I can use the same math to prove the town green is free. All the town has to do is pick up loose change that is dropped on the green for all eternity, thereby providing infinite income to the town. Or are you going to argue that double infinity is bigger than infinity?

Exaggerating doesn't win arguments, it just makes you look irrational. You should listen to your little sister and find another dead horse to beat.

The Town Green is on land previously assessed at $4.5 million, and it cost around 2 million to design and build. This $6.5 million (opportunity) cost will only be "recouped" if the Town Green raises the value of adjacent land enough to generate offsetting tax revenue. To argue otherwise is to misunderstand the concept of recoupment. As for the attempt to argue that the Town Green has infinite value, you might consult an Econommcs 001 text book and read about present discounted value.

If the cost of the land was assessed previously at 4.5m they got a pretty good deal for 2m. If you are not into parks, I can understand why you would not think the green was a good investment, but others in the town like the amenity. Below is a link to an article I got off the website on public spaces quoted earlier. It explains the benefits of parks and public spaces (and stresses the importance of maintenance). The town green has its faults, but as it's built already, not to make good use of the site would be an even bigger expense to the town. http://www.thestar.com/article/235503

I must clarify. When I stated "To keep talking about the town green which represents 18,699 sq feet of Vienna is spinning wheels," I was not stating it was beating a dead horse. I meant that to talk about the TG being the most valuable piece of land when it comes to development is ridiculous. There are far better locations and if we could rezone and rebuild, the town green, I'm guessing, would not be nearly as attractive as an open air space the private sector could create.

I have no problem with discussion of the Green. You obviously want any criticism to stop. It will stop when Maple Avenue becomes form base code (and my sidewalks are built).

But, Maud, Jane, George, Lori, Edythe, and Mike all killed the Maple Vision Project which said to move to form based code. OUR TOWN LEADERS ARE NOT SMART PEOPLE. They only want power and DO NOT want Vienna to be better.

I took a year of econ in college, but Virginia Tech didn't offer "Econommcs 001". Evidently your Econommcs 001 class taught you some wrong and stupid things about opportunity cost. I suggest you dig out your Econommcs book and read that chapter again before trying to use that term in public.

If you're trying to argue that the town should sell the green for commercial development, then why stop there? Sell all the parks! The opportunity cost of not selling them is astronomical, when calculated using the principles of Econommcs.

I know full well it's stupid to claim the green has infinite value. Just like I know it's stupid to claim it cost $10M. It appears that you too believe $10M is stupid, because you terminated your exaggeration at $6.5M. HV will be chiming in to call you a Maudite soon.

Ad Infinitum, thanks for the morning smile. You might start by understanding that HV and I are two different people. I use $6.5 million because that is a lower bound on the opportunity cost. As for using the term "opportunity cost" in public, it just so happens that I will be doing exactly that today in front of a large audience. While you are back checking out your introductory Economics, you might reacquaint yourself with concepts such as diminishing marginal utility. That might give you a hint as to why it is consistent to support Glyndon Park and many other existing parks (as I do) yet oppose the Town Green.

Keely, you make an interesting point when you note that TC made a good real estate transaction. Had TC sold the land, there would have been a capital gain of $2.5 million, and I would have led the cheers. As it was, after paying for design and construction, they have poured in an amount equal to the market value. So, if they sold now, they would at best have broken even, whereas they could have been $2.5 million ahead.

This issue is not about liking parks versus not liking them. I happen to think that the Town Green and, to a lesser extent, Sarah Walker Mercer Park were not good ideas. TG is simply an abomination on many levels. But I would adamantly oppose the sale or substantial alteration of any other existing park.

Vienna is not for lack of public parks. We have plenty. The fact is that they so foolishly spent our money when other things are clearly more important.

What goes through the typical Vienna Town Council and Mayor's head? "Hmm, traffic sucks. Our sidewalks sucks. I know! Let's spend MILLIONS on a outhouse, broken fountain and dead trees. That will show everyone whose boss around here."