In for a penny, in for a nickel. Voting on the plan is just silly since it is dependent upon passage of the text amendment. If the amendment fails for whatever reasons the plan is worthless. THis vote is nothing more than "we can do whatever we want because we can and we dare you to do something and besides we don't like you." CHildish but in the end harmless.

Vice Mayor Donley's statement about listening and agreement would have a lot more credibility if the city did not go out of its way to invoke obscure technicalities (which very well may be wrong) to prevent due process of law. 200+ people signed a petition, and instead of listening to that plea the city simply said that it believed it is under no legal obligation to listen, so they would not. Pretty amazing that the city will pay attention to a petition of citizens only under court order but that is where we are. The courts will have to tell us who is right on that I suppose. What poor leadership to instigate and irritate for no apparent purpose.

Ms. Gibney, since the vast majority of Alexandrians have not expressed an opinion on this matter, you cannot say that the elected officials have not represented the will of the people any more than I can. Look at the initial Plan, then look at the current one that passed. You will find many compromises. But then, it appears that the only position that you consider a compromise is trash the whole plan and just do what you want.

Mr. Auld, the Alexandrians I am referring to are the most affected Alexandrians, the property owners who live within 300 feet of the development ( yet we are certainly not alone, the testimonies of numerous neighborhood associations, including Old Town Civic Assn., throughout Alexandria who also oppose the existing waterfront plan at the 1/21 city council hearing are on record). And, yes, Mr. Auld, laws such as the 300 feet petition forcing a super majority city council vote do exist to protect citizens' property rights. And yes, the city has chosen to ignore this will. As far as trashing the "whole plan"? Well... maybe you've missed all the hoopla? It's centers on hotels and rezoning, parking and traffic. The compromise we were offered was to continue with rezoning and 2 hotels and no parking or traffic plan in place. At Saturday's council meeting, I heard your wife thank the fire department for saving your home. Homes have a special meaning for all of us Mr. Auld, not just yours. It is our right to protect ours.

Glad you clarified the "will of the people" meaning. You have a petition, and an appeal going thru the process. This is your right. It will be heard, and a decision will be made. Now that we have clarified the population meaning, can you explain your Mr. Donley comment about " difference between listening and ignoring vs listening and compromising." Was Mr. Donley, on his own, to make changes to the plan in accordance with your wishes, that have all been heard before, processed, and concluded upon? Also, could you explain to me why your group wants to kill this plan. You know that your initial desire, to have the City purchase those properties for parks has no chance of happening. So what will happen. Those property owners will give up and start to build what they can now under current zoning. You will have townhouses, other types of residences and/or offices, which many studies show puts more traffic on the streets than hotels. That is what will result from your efforts. I dont' get it. Have you thouroughly tricked your self into believing this will not happen?

Mr. DOnley was better served not being a smart aleck about it, and the point still stands: DONley's point about listening would be more credible if the city did not cite obscure technicalities to ignore a petition from 200+ citizens. They could have, for example, considered hte petition and developed a plan that had 6 votes.

THe fact that the city has been mired in BZA appeals and lawsuits for 2-3 years now on every decision of significance tells us that there is something very wrong with how the city is being managed.

Thanks Beth, Do you feel the same for Robinson Terminal North, i.e., support residences there also?

Ditching the plan and letting each property develop on it's own (your anti one size fits all argument) could result in a wild west shootout with no control by the citizens af Alexandria. The City needs to have a plan in place that gives developers the parameters to work within. I don't agree with Mr. Fannon's viewpoint here. I actually felt Mr. Fannon made a political calculation in his vote, not one that addressed the best interests of all Alexandrians.

No control? That's what rezoning will create! Goodbye Old Town. Hello National Harbor. Bigger is not better.