Historic Vienna: #1 Vienna Political Blog

Maud Robinson Prefers 1960s Style Strip Malls. Why?

Monday night at a Vienna Town Council work session, the Vienna Town Council discussed the Maple Avenue Vision with an engineering firm proposing a feasibility study for the revitalization of Maple Avenue. During the meeting Vienna's abundance of one-story strip malls was broached and the comparison was made to Clarendon's new low-rise Market Common development. Watch carefully (video) what Maud Robinson has to say about this jewel of Clarendon:

Robinson states on the video:

"...it was very hard to find anyone there on a beautiful sunny day, there were a lot of glitzy shops that didn't seem to have any customers."

This can only be characterized as propaganda. Why would she say something so patently false? It would not be over the top to characterize Robinson's statements as lies. Not only is this development packed with people, restaurants and shops, it has won substantial awards. Does this mean we accept it all for Vienna blindly? No. But why does Robinson have the need to make things up to defend her position? Is her only political skill "fear mongering"?

For example, in defending Vienna's older strip malls, Robinson says they are good for "mom and pop" shops. Last we checked Vienna strip malls housed the likes of Giant, Safeway, Popeyes, Radio Shack, 7-Eleven, Subway and the list goes on and on. Strip malls are ugly, pedestrian unfriendly, parking lot choked eyesores. However, Vienna does not have to be stuck. There are options.

For those not familiar with Market Commons, here are some pictures:

Market Commons in Clarendon, VA

Market Commons in Clarendon, VA

Market Commons in Clarendon, VA

We are assuming Robinson, who is now on the record as favoring 1960s strip malls, would much rather keep this Vienna eyesore of a landmark:

Vienna Strip Mall: An Example of Maud Robinson Preferred Devleopment

Is anyone paying attention to what Maud Robinson is actually saying and doing? The people of Vienna have a clear choice: follow Maud Robinson and likes of Laurie Cole down dead ends OR accept the real world and make Vienna a better place.

Vienna Strip Mall: An Example of Maud Robinson Preferred Devleopment

Laurie Cole at Work Session Monday Night. Cole is a Maud Robinson Protégé.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

New signs have been appearing around Church Street in Vienna. The signs seem to be everywhere and all point in the general direction of "Historic Church Street". What does that mean exactly? Does that mean the new building that just replaced Vienna's first fire department is "historic"? Or maybe the new brick sidewalks are "historic"? Perhaps the caboose brought in during the 1980s, that is "historic"? Is the brand new Vienna Presbyterian Church "historic"? Is the new building that houses Nielsen’s Frozen Custard "historic"? The auto-parts store, that is "historic"? Maybe, the building on the corner of Church and Center Street set for demolition at any moment, that must be "historic"?

Of course, Church Street is not historic. Nothing on the Street, except maybe the Freeman Store, is even remotely "historic". And the Freeman Store is not on any historical registers, nor is it in a historic district. Why all the wordsmithing with the word "historic"? That ladies and gentleman is how Vienna Town Council Member Maud Robinson operates. The truth doesn't matter to her. She wants to pretend Church Street is historic, so she will do and say everything that makes the ruse stick. Why does Robinson spend so much time creating "fake" historicity in Vienna?

Posted by Historic Vienna at 08:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Back in 1985 former Vienna Mayor Charlie Robinson (Maud Robinson's husband) spoke against letting a property out of the District. Listen to his argument:

Charlie Robinson Audio (MP3)

Does anyone in Vienna beyond Maud Robinson believe this today in 2006? Does anyone believe after the 20 years of cronyism that unfolded following those words from Mayor Robinson that the District places no hardships on property owners? Is Maud Robinson willing to put her house in the Windover Heights Historic District and back up her husband's words?

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

After the Planning Commission voted last night 5-3 to deny a petition to have a property removed from the Historic District, Maud Robinson "dressed down" one of the 3 Commission members who voted to allow the property out of the District. Can you imagine being on the Commission, asking fair questions and voting your conscious, only to have Maud yell at you? You can never underestimate the nastiness of Maud Robinson. Sadly, while many people may have fond memories of Mayor Robinson (her husband), Maud Robinson is not a close facsimile of the former Mayor. It is time for Maud Robinson to retire and move on.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

How does Maud Robinson promote "preservation" in the Windover Heights Historic District? Can you spell demolition? Here is some great video (MPG):

This video was shot today February 9th. It is yet another house receiving 'Vienna style historic preservation'! What's the point of the Historic District if this is legal and approved by Maud Robinson? If you can blow every house up like this - why have a District?

Before "Preservation":

After "Preservation":

Posted by Historic Vienna at 12:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

While the Chairman of Windover Heights Board of Review recently resigned under pressure, he had no shortage of defenders in the 'Spin (Twilight) Zone':

"The barrage of insinuation and innuendo recently directed toward Mr. Bukont is reprehensible. I am very sorry that he and his family have been subjected to it. There is always room for civil discourse concerning different views in public affairs. But insidious, unfounded attacks on a person's integrity are beyond the pale of civil debate."
Laurie Cole, January 30, 2006

"It bothers me that we have to lose people in this way."
George Lovelace, January 30, 2006

"I feel firmly that tolerance is at an end."
Maud Robinson, January 30, 2006

On December 6, 2005 in full view of Town Staff and numerous Town residents, then Chairman of the Windover Heights Board of Review Steve Bukont called citizens, "fucking morons".

Why are three Town Council members defending such behavior? We doubt Laurie Cole would be flowing with praise if she had the f-bomb whipped at her. Or is that type of talk 'civil discourse' for Cole? Or better yet, does this video represent the 'civil debate' Cole speaks of?

Mrs. Cole it is not 1950. It is 2006. You can't sit up there on your podium and throw political spin out expecting it to stick unrebutted.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 11:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This site firmly establishes the Windover Heights Historic District as a fraud. Disagree? Watch this rambling diatribe from Council Member Maud Robinson:

The Vienna Town Code, the law that governs the Historic District, does not speak to "flights of fancy". It doesn't mention "Victorian". The code doesn't say that when you want to justify new construction to run off to the library for "rules". Robinson knows that every word she utters is baseless. She knows she is making it all up. She knows the Windover Heights Historic District makes no reference to the age or character of the structures within the District's boundary. That still doesn't stop Robinson from manipulation and deception. Can you imagine Robinson under oath?

Jane Seeman exposes Robinson:

Maud Robinson: A Severe Problem with the Truth

Posted by Historic Vienna at 09:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In 2005 Council Member Maud Robinson on "color":

In 2005 Windover Heights Board of Review Chairman Steve Bukont on "color":

One is clearly not telling the truth. Why should residents of Vienna tolerate officials in power playing fast and loose with the truth?

Posted by Historic Vienna at 08:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This web site is not the only voice declaring that it is time to go for the so-called historic district in Vienna. Maud Robinson (2004 video 10MG) discusses the possibility of disbanding the Windover Heights Historic District with Steve Bukont.

Maud Robinson

Posted by Historic Vienna at 03:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Charles Anderson lobbied hard in 2004 for this house not to be built. Fortunately, he was stopped in his tracks and the rest of Vienna now benefits. But what is the real story with Chuck Anderson?

In 1997 he bought this little white house on the outside of the Windover Heights Historic District's boundary. He ripped this house down and built this new one in its place. Anderson's new house was then added to the historic district for no reason in 1998. His house was never reviewed - it was just added.

Now back to 2004 and watch this video of Anderson right after his public speech to keep 315 Windover from being built in the Windover Heights Historic District. Just so we are all clear: Anderson wanted to make sure 315 Windover was denied even though he never had to deal with an approval process for his new house.

Frank Lillis and Chuck Anderson
discuss how to keep 315 Windover
from building a new house.

The video also shows clear manipulation of the facts by Maud Robinson.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

We recently wrote about Frank and Joan Lillis attempting to lower property values.

Unfortunately, they had backing from the Vienna Town Council in the form of Maud Robinson, George Lovelace and Laurie Cole. These members of Vienna Town Council voted in 2004 against the now completed $1.8 million dollar house. Here is the gorgeous new house:

Click to Enlarge

What sane person would vote against this house? Cole, Robinson and Lovelace did. They should be ashamed. They had no legal reason to vote against it. Here is the house torn down before the new one.

Next time you think about voting for Laurie Cole, Maud Robinson or George Lovelace don't forget their vote to lower property values. These three if left to their own devices would make your house worth less money. How can George Lovelace expect to get elected Mayor in 2006 campaigning to lower property values?

Here is the type of house Lovelace, Cole and Robinson would prefer at 313 Windover Avenue. Does any of this make sense?

Posted by Historic Vienna at 07:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Watch the 2004 video of Maud Robinson proposing to "fix" the Windover Heights Historic District. She said this one year after two lawsuits were filed.

Interestingly, listen to what Steve Bukont says in 2005 (MP3). Does this make sense? Robinson says in 2004 it is time to fix it. Bukont says in 2005 it doesn't need fixing. We say this entire District is a sham.

Laurie Cole, Maud Robinson and
Historic District supporters Frank Lillis
and Paul Layer

Posted by Historic Vienna at 03:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Maud Robinson declared in 2005 that the Windover Heights Historic District gives carte blanche to act. Watch the video. If you have carte blanche, what is the point of a review board? If you have carte blanche why are some citizens turned down by the review board and council? Keep in mind that the word "Victorian" doesn't exist in Vienna law. Robinson appears to also have carte blanche in making up the law as she goes.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Carey Sienicki, who appears to have Town Council aspirations and residing at 427 Center Street, offered this 2005 statement on "color" in the Windover Heights Historic District:

Later on in 2005 Maud Robinson offered this statement on "color":

Make sense? We repeat: the Windover Heights Historic District is a 100% abuse of property rights.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Watch the 2005 video of Mayor Jane Seeman and Council Member Maud Robinson fight over the historic district. George Lovelace loves to say that the District has stood the test of time for 25 years. If that is so, why do these two women have such widely differing views of the law?

Posted by Historic Vienna at 01:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Laine Hyde and Maud Robinson run Vienna's only political action committee 'Historic Vienna, Inc.' Don't let the little old lady, garden club spin fool you, utilizing this Town funded organization Hyde (230 Lovers Lane, NW) and Robinson have spent years carefully crafting a 'history' to buttress the existence of the Windover Heights Historic District. Why do this? This gives them the power to give their friends free rides along the approval process, but with people they don't like it gives them the power to harass.

Vienna Council Member Maud Robinson

Historic Vienna Inc., under Hyde's and Robinson's stewardship, puts on a walking tour within the Windover Heights Historic District every year. It is called the 'Walk on the Hill'. During the tour they hand out a brochure that purports to show the historical significance for each and every house in the District.

They do all this to convince people that the area comprising the Windover Heights Historic District is the same now as it was in 1850 (or whatever year they make up). The brochure and the Walk on the Hill are also designed to push their agenda that 'historical preservation' is taking place.

Unfortunately, there is clear evidence that 'history' for Hyde and Robinson changes every time they vote to demolish a house.

Example #1:

Inside the Walk on the Hill brochure from a few years back this entry was logged:

308 West. The original part of this residence is an 18th century log and brick cabin. The beams are still visible inside the house. The shaded, naturalized property is most appropriate to the old cabin.

Then under Hyde's leadership on the Windover Heights Board of Review, the house was razed on her vote. One day it's the 'historic cabin'; the next day it's two new houses.

The brochure has since been edited by Hyde and Robinson to read:

308 West and 201 Windover. These two homes were built in 2000 and replace a single structure.

Isn't it amazing how the original story of the cabin just goes 'poof'? We propose the brochure to read:

308 West and 201 Windover. These two homes were built in 2000 and replace the so-called 'historic' cabin Laine Hyde voted to demolish.

Example #2:

Inside that same Walk on the Hill brochure this entry was logged:

316 Windover, known as 'Windover'. Built @1898 and enlarged @1909 by Mr. Whipple for his widowed daughter-in-law, who liked to entertain. There is still the huge tin tank in the attic that was used to gravity feed water to the rest of the house. During the Civil War a round log house was said to house officers.

Then under Hyde's leadership (and her vote) on the Windover Heights Board of Review, the house was demolished to any recognizable extent and expanded to 15,000 square feet. One day it's the 'historic tin tank', the next day it's the largest house ever built in Vienna...and no more tin tank!

The brochure has since been edited by Hyde and Robinson to read:

316 Windover, known as 'Windover'. Built @1898 and enlarged @1909 by Mr. Whipple for his widowed daughter-in-law, who liked to entertain. During the Civil War a round log house was said to house officers. Extensive renovations of the house and gardens in 2003-4.

Extensive renovations? Give us a break! Anyone with a heartbeat living in Vienna saw what happened. They built a brand new house. Gardens? There were no gardens.

Mrs. Robinson the next time you wave this brochure in the air at a Council meeting declaring it the inventory for the Windover Heights Historic District, well at least now the citizens of Vienna will more fully understand your manipulations, spins and half-truths.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 09:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Maud Robinson: Preservationist? Not even close:

"The home at 316 Windover contains a tin tank in the attic, which once provided the water supply for the house."
Maud Robinson's 1991 Press Kit Highlighting Vienna's Historic District

While Robinson once spoke highly of the old-time plumbing system for 316 Windover in a PR campaign to make the Windover Heights Historic District appear legitimate, her lack of actual preservation now leaves the tin tank sitting outside: view the tin tank.

Robinson added in PR campaign:

"Part of the structure at 308 West Street is log and chink, which dates back to the 1700's."

The house Robinson refers to was torn down in the late 1999. Does anyone remember Robinson standing up to save the "log and chink"? Two brand new houses stand there now. Nice job of preservation Maud!

Posted by Historic Vienna at 09:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the problems with Vienna's so-called Historic District is that there are NO rules. Here is what Maud Robinson says:

"You have carte blanche. To do a very basic analogy it’s sort of like making a pot if you are a potter. In a certain form. Ok. We have the Queen Anne form. Then after you get the pot made you can put any kind of decoration on it that you want. I can find nothing that absolutely forbids what Mr. Haight did…we might consider what Mr. Haight could have done and no one could have stopped him. If he had on a whim or flight of whimsy decided to paint that house in red and orange stripes, he could have done it and there is nothing in the code that says he could not have done it. I have respect for the Board, I believe the board is an essential component of keeping the historic district intact, but I sincerely feel in this case they went a little overboard. I feel they are applying contemporary standards or interpretations to Victorian when we are talking about a period from 1837-1901."

Maud Robinson

If a resident has carte blanche (which is a falsehood since Robinson has voted against applications) what is the point of a review board? Where did this period 1837-1901 come from? The largest most expensive home ever built in Vienna is in the District. It was built in 2003.

This is all nonsense.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 12:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Maud Robinson's recent words:

"We have talked about this a lot, but we have never done anything. The time has come to fish or cut bait. If we care about the historic district, if we think the ordinance is deficient let’s move ahead and do something. I would move that this matter, that a work session be held at the earliest possible date on the Windover board of review ordinance to examine it closely to see if it has any deficiencies and I would further invite members of the historic district who live up there, interested, concerned individuals to feel free to submit to the council any suggestions they have as to how to rectify any deficiencies the ordinance may have."

Interestingly, not long after Robinson said that, the Chairman of the Historic Review Board Steve Bukont said this:

"I have been advised by the Town Attorney to um…given that there is pending litigation that involves this board to wait for the resolution of that litigation so that the Town can advise us which direction they would like us to go. But they saw no need at this time to do that. They felt the ordinance was quite adequate as drafted and um we are welcome to make recommendations on our own but as far as the Town was concerned, that being the Town Attorney’s office, the ordinance stands and is quite adequate as it exists."

Why the contradiction between Robinson and Bukont?

Listen to Steve Bukont here.

It makes you wonder if Steve Bukont has now changed his tune to protect his multi-million dollar business...a business that depends on Maud Robinson's vote.

Posted by Historic Vienna at 12:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)