Anonymous wrote:Very good. I hope that is the case. I understood a church wanting to do something good with the property, but Sunrise is just as gredy as a home developer. My parents moved to McLean in 1972, and my mom passed away two years ago. Before that we looked at retirement facilities, and no one in the family could afford Sunrise pricing. Connect a virtual straw from a retirement account to Sunrise's and they will suck out all the money from the elderly as possible. Its simply not true that everyone in McLean is a millionaire and can afford assisted living in McLean. My friend's parents, sold their McLean home and are loving life at Ashby Ponds in Asburn. Their heirs will be given the full cost of the condo upon their passing. Wow, no wonder they are expanding that facility out in Asburn.
Anonymous wrote:Very good. I hope that is the case. I understood a church wanting to do something good with the property, but Sunrise is just as gredy as a home developer. My parents moved to McLean in 1972, and my mom passed away two years ago. Before that we looked at retirement facilities, and no one in the family could afford Sunrise pricing. Connect a virtual straw from a retirement account to Sunrise's and they will suck out all the money from the elderly as possible. Its simply not true that everyone in McLean is a millionaire and can afford assisted living in McLean. My friend's parents, sold their McLean home and are loving life at Ashby Ponds in Asburn. Their heirs will be given the full cost of the condo upon their passing. Wow, no wonder they are expanding that facility out in Asburn.
Anonymous wrote:Wow, too bad the forum turned so nasty. Back to reality, so the land was sold to Sunrise. I doubt Sunrise would go through with the purchase unless they had some assurance from the county or a representative that rezoning is possible. The plans will most likely go through tbe BZA and citizens can make their voices heard. The opponents of the project need to be looking at ways to scale the project back, safety and traffic issues, and why the zoning laws should remain. My street is zoned R3 and now the feeling of suburban space is gone because developers were allowed to build to the allowable setbacks. The original character of the neighborhood is gone, if anyone cares about that. The corner site in question will lose tbat beautiful open field. I pray the project will be at least reduced in height and unit count.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The people who live around there should be celebrating a Sunrise development, lest the space otherwise be turned into something like that tacky LAmbiance of McLean subdivision across the street. At least Sunrise won't bring more kids into the overcrowded schools.
The McLean schools aren't particularly overcrowded, particularly compared with APS these days. At most 15 homes could be built on the site given the current zoning, and it's safe to assume only a fraction of the families would have kids or send them to public school. It's a residential area and both L'Ambiance and other developments in the area have more than held their value. I can more than understand the opposition to skirting the zoning laws and allowing Sunrise to change the character of the neighborhood. If John Foust is so eager to do favors for Sunrise, let him redistrict Balls Hill Road near his house to accommodate them.
McLean would be more over crowded if their class sizes were as small as Arlington's. Arlington can solve quite a bit of its problem by raising the class size by 5 students.