Drew,
I agree with the bulk of your analysis. During the past ten years, the discourse of American urban planning has undergone some fundamental changes. Today, there is more of an emphasis on smart growth, which is, in a way, a return to the form of the early 1900s.
One hundred years ago, cities did not plan around the automobile; they planned for the pedestrian. They planned for rich, vibrant, walkable, and scalable neighborhoods and commercial districts. They developed extensive streetcar systems. Cities were planned in intuitive and elaborate grids– always with an attention to the location of civic institutions such as schools, post offices, and courthouses.
When Alexandria was first developed, it followed these basic patterns. Our inner core is, indeed, an example of traditional city planning, whereas development throughout the past fifty years (beginning in and around 1960) has followed the script of American sprawl development– large lot single family homes in cul-de-sac subdivisions, a noticeable segregation of zoning uses, and little emphasis on the pedestrian or the bicyclist.
I have read practically all of the comprehensive, strategic, and/or master plans produced for the City of Alexandria throughout the past 15 to 20 years, and while I agree with you on practically everything else, I cannot agree with you about the purpose or intent of the Alexandria Urban Master Plan.
Of course, the automobile must be considered in any planning document; it’s an inescapable reality of American life. To be sure, the Alexandria Urban Master Plan is nearly a decade old, and no one believes that it is universally applicable or implementable. (Though I think you’d be surprised to realize how prescient parts of the plan actually are).
***
With that said, I think we have to acknowledge that Downtown redevelopment is– in and of itself– not a panacea for inner core redevelopment. Focusing on our riverfront and what the Mayor calls “activity corridors” with equal enthusiasm can enrich much more of Alexandria and affect many more citizens.
The Urban Master Plan is not Alexandria’s only “master plan.” Indeed, the planners who drafted the document were charged with a very specific task: the redevelopment of a certain geographical area within the City. And in my opinion, it does a suburb job identifying and addressing future land uses, walkability, and greenspace. But again, this specific document is not the entire city’s “master plan.”
Before the Alexandria Urban Master Plan, there was Alexandria 2010, which is an exceptional document created back in 1992. 2010 is, among other things, concerned with demographic changes throughout the entire City and was written in anticipation of the closure of England Air Force Base. It includes bold recommendations for things such as a Greenway Linear Park throughout the City as well as practical recommendations for the number of single-family and multi-family housing units (projected to be needed).
2010 is probably the most comprehensive planning document the City possesses, and fortunately, since most of it is concerned with addressing projected demographic needs (and not with the types of development, per se), the document is still relevant and applicable, though obviously in need of a few updates.
The City also possesses plans for the Ruston Foundry, Interstate 49, and, of course, the McElroy Strategic Plan, which is primarily concerned with the redevelopment of Alexandria’s main corridors.
Notably, every single one of these plans was developed after consultation with neighborhood groups, community leaders, business people, and other stakeholders. Some documents may represent a greater diversity of opinion than others, but, still, all of them relied on citizen input.
***
Simply put, there is no need to reinvent the wheel here.
Smart growth teaches us what works and what doesn’t work.
Of course, Alexandria is a unique place with our own unique opportunities and challenges.
CenLamar 
Leave a comment