Falls Church - Say no to Sunrise signs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sunrise would also mean sidewalks on the Westmoreland side, between Kirby and Lemon. More loss of tree cover and disruption similar to that on Old Dominion for the last year would follow. It is in the plan. Please don't.

Didn't someone complain that people get hit by cars? Sidewalks will help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A six story multi -bed facility is simply inappropriate for the residential neighborhood of 1 and 2 level homes.

Most of the rebuilds on the teardown lots are way more than 2 levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A six story multi -bed facility is simply inappropriate for the residential neighborhood of 1 and 2 level homes.

I preferred the townhouse plan that was already rejected by the neighborhood. It would not had that particular problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sunrise would also mean sidewalks on the Westmoreland side, between Kirby and Lemon. More loss of tree cover and disruption similar to that on Old Dominion for the last year would follow. It is in the plan. Please don't.

The disruption on Old Dominon (in Alrington) is for far more than sidewalks. They have been replacing the main line sewer pipes too- thus causing most of the issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A six story multi -bed facility is simply inappropriate for the residential neighborhood of 1 and 2 level homes.

I preferred the townhouse plan that was already rejected by the neighborhood. It would not had that particular problem.

What townhouse plan? I am not aware that this was ever proposed and I live very close.

[Anonymous]

I found a flyer from the pro-sunrise folks on my door last night. They are trying to drum up support for this project it seems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A six story multi -bed facility is simply inappropriate for the residential neighborhood of 1 and 2 level homes.

I preferred the townhouse plan that was already rejected by the neighborhood. It would not had that particular problem.

What townhouse plan? I am not aware that this was ever proposed and I live very close.

Hmm, let me think a bit. It was after the orginal church tried to get a cell phone tower (which was also shot down by the neighbors) and when they first put it on the market- before the current Church. Then the cell phone people tried to get in Longfellow when it was under construction and with the new (at the time) Principal So, I would say 6-7ish years ago?

[tarashaun]

I have several concerns about this, and please PM me if you share them:

1) I have a child in Haycock, and another who will also attend later. We live less than a mile from it, which means the school deems him a walker. To walk to Haycock, he must walk past this intersection. The intersection is already busy during dropoff and pickup times, not only for Longfellow, but also for Haycock- which has younger children. At some point, I'd like him to be able to walk or bike to school, as the school is not offering us any transportation. Having him walk through an area with a commercial facility with increased traffic is not appropriate, given that the neighborhood is not zoned for that and it was never intended. The schools are not going to adjust the transportation routes, although they should- and if they did, that is an increased cost for the community.

2) As others have noted, there are MANY assisted care facilities in the area- at least 4 within 1 mile of this one. In addition to the new one near Chesterbrook (completed after this process began), there is now another one planned up Great Falls in an old elementary school. http://www.mcleanconnection.com/news/2016/jan/28/outlook-new-mclean/
IF this new Kirby facility is not successful (oversupply has to saturate the market at some point), what becomes of the building and parcel? Is the neighborhood then left with accepting whatever moves in there, even though it is not a nursing home anymore?

3) Sunrise is interested in this parcel exactly BECAUSE it is residential (R-3). If it had to purchase a commercially zoned property, the price tag on a parcel this size would be much higher. It's getting a great deal on this property because it was priced with the expectation it will be developed into single value comes, instead of a much higher density property. Sunrise is the winner here, at our expense.

Also, is anyone familiar with whether this church is allowed to accept other offers right now? It was a community church, it seems such a shame that they are willing to allow this as their legacy to our community when they leave it.

[Anonymous]

tarashaun wrote:I have several concerns about this, and please PM me if you share them:

1) I have a child in Haycock, and another who will also attend later. We live less than a mile from it, which means the school deems him a walker. To walk to Haycock, he must walk past this intersection. The intersection is already busy during dropoff and pickup times, not only for Longfellow, but also for Haycock- which has younger children. At some point, I'd like him to be able to walk or bike to school, as the school is not offering us any transportation. Having him walk through an area with a commercial facility with increased traffic is not appropriate, given that the neighborhood is not zoned for that and it was never intended. The schools are not going to adjust the transportation routes, although they should- and if they did, that is an increased cost for the community.

2) As others have noted, there are MANY assisted care facilities in the area- at least 4 within 1 mile of this one. In addition to the new one near Chesterbrook (completed after this process began), there is now another one planned up Great Falls in an old elementary school. http://www.mcleanconnection.com/news/2016/jan/28/outlook-new-mclean/
IF this new Kirby facility is not successful (oversupply has to saturate the market at some point), what becomes of the building and parcel? Is the neighborhood then left with accepting whatever moves in there, even though it is not a nursing home anymore?

3) Sunrise is interested in this parcel exactly BECAUSE it is residential (R-3). If it had to purchase a commercially zoned property, the price tag on a parcel this size would be much higher. It's getting a great deal on this property because it was priced with the expectation it will be developed into single value comes, instead of a much higher density property. Sunrise is the winner here, at our expense.

Also, is anyone familiar with whether this church is allowed to accept other offers right now? It was a community church, it seems such a shame that they are willing to allow this as their legacy to our community when they leave it.

Please write to Supervisor Foust (email) and let him know how you feel. My understanding is that Sunrise is paying more for the parcel than a developer would pay. I also live nearby and am concerned. Based on your description, you probably live in Nantucket-Marlborough. Please do what you can to publicize this issue in your neighborhood thru listserves, etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously has any of you gone to visit a Sunrise??? It will not generate traffic, that's ridiculous. Really there are so many worse things that could take that spot I don't see how this is such a big issue.

The traffic at the ones in Arlington off Glebe and Wilson is a PITA. I can see why people who live near the McLean site in a more residential area don't want the land rezoned.

What are you talking about? I live across the street from the one on Glebe and there is NO traffic issue. For the one on Wilson, the traffic is because of the school.

I can understand why people don't want the type of traffic there is on Glebe. Or the panhandlers either, for that matter, although they presumably aren't Sunrise residents.

The traffic on Glebe has zero to do with Sunrise. It has to do with being a major north/south thoroughfare in Arlington. There are no backups coming into or out of that street - the only backups are across Glebe, because Woodstock is the end of the road that starts at Spout Run and becomes Lorcom. Kirby is also already busy because it's a cut through from McLean to 7. Sunrise will not make that better or worse.

Of course it does, and of course it would. It aggravates the traffic in a crowded part of Arlington. If people in McLean and Falls Church wanted to live in Arlington, they would live there instead. It's pretty obvious the agenda of those advocating for a Sunrise in this nice residential area is just to diminish its appeal. Go away.

Let's be fair, now ... I think it's a little paranoid to think that the 'agenda' of anyone is to willfully hurt any community. Reasonable people can disagree on the pro/con debate, but the agenda of those supporting it is economic development and enhanced tax revenue, which would ostensibly be used to enhance county programs or impede the upward march of taxes. Whether there's enough upside to offset some potential legitimate drawbacks (traffic isn't one, loss of aesthetic appeal is), is a debatable question.

But, I think the McClean Citizens Association loses credibility when it throws out 'everyone is out to get us' style conspiracy theories or asserts that all development at any cost will diminish the area's appeal. There needs to be some balance here.

Welcome to McLean. Hyperbole at its best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Living two blocks from the site gives me a good idea of what a Sunrise facility would do to the neighborhood with regard to traffic congestion and incompatibility with adjacent homes. It is a terrible idea. The space would make a lovely park. We need the trees and open space more than a six story facility in the middle of a residential area.

This is the best idea yet and is what should have happened with the Evans Farm Inn property. An ad-hoc group of citizens would have to raise the money and pay the church fair market value, though.

Won't happen. The crowd wants to dictate, not contribute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

tarashaun wrote:

3) Sunrise is interested in this parcel exactly BECAUSE it is residential (R-3). If it had to purchase a commercially zoned property, the price tag on a parcel this size would be much higher. It's getting a great deal on this property because it was priced with the expectation it will be developed into single value comes, instead of a I have several concerns about this, and please PM me if you share them:
uch higher density property. Sunrise is the winner here, at our expense.

... My understanding is that Sunrise is paying more for the parcel than a developer would pay.

Actually, the church was offered MORE by developers of single family homes, but prefers to sell to a nursing home so took the lower offer.

[Anonymous]

My family moved to McLean in the 70's, and now my husband and I have been living nearby the intersection since 1996. Back in my grade school years McLean was considered a nice suburb with ease for my dad to get to DC. Over the years I have seen so many parcels of open land disappear, to allow for infill of residential and businesses. The corner in question was not dangerous, but it is now as stands. The diagonal corner with the exclusive stay out of our rich townhouse development used to be a vegetable stand on the corner. There are so many farm and home acres gone or subdivided now, that I understand those of us being called NIMBYS. The suburbs of McLean have miraculously managed to stay attractive because of careful planningand a great MCA. Sunrise is not needed at that location and would be a detriment to the intersection by cramming a huge facility onto the site. Yes, we nimbys have a valid concern about our kids crossing that intersection. They took away our busing. Now, if Sunrise is allowed, then can I construct 3 more levels on top of my little house, exceeding the 35 foot height rule? Seems fair to me.

[Anonymous]

If you are interested in this issue, there's a meeting at the McLean Community Center Tuesday night at 7:00.

[Anonymous]

The current church doesnt have services at the site. There is zero traffic. A 60,000 SF 90 bed medical facility (that is what this is) will have a huge impact on traffic. An independent study already showed it would be several hundreds more cars a day coming in and out . It is logical that people living in the immediate vicinity would prefer about 6-8 single family homes. That is what the land is zoned for. I am not sure why there has to be name calling. This isn't about NIMBYS this is about people asking the County to follow their own planning and zoning laws, which require facilities such as this to be on 5 or more acres of land.