Reply to Falls Church - Say no to Sunrise signs?

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "Falls Church - Say no to Sunrise signs?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. [/quote]

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.

[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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[b] the agenda of those advocating for a Sunrise in this nice residential area is just to diminish its appeal.[/b]  Go away.[/quote]

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

Welcome to McLean.  Hyperbole at its best. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics