Stop the Proposal to Build an Assisted Living Facility in a Resource Protection Area (RPA)

Planning Commission Hearing on Assisted Living Facility: Ongoing Need For Citizen Input To Request Dismissal of Orr/Benchmark SE 2018-HM-024 

There have been numerous developments over the past few weeks. The applicant has requested an indefinite deferral.  Applicant’s letter can be found at www.ProtectHMR.com.  The Planning Commission will be addressing the applicant’s request at the September 12, 2019, hearing originally scheduled for Decision Only.

Citizens have been informed by county staff that the applicant has not submitted any new information to try and address the Planning Commission's numerous questions and stated concerns since their July 18th public hearing.  A critical issue highlighted at the public hearing by citizens was the applicant’s failure to locate and identify a natural spring flowing into Angelico Branch that had been documented as far back as 1987. They have yet to offer any explanation for this significant omission in its topographic and wetlands surveys.

Contrary to the applicant's claims, they have not met all of the standards for approval.  These shortfalls have been extensively documented with the help of community input during this process. We’re asking concerned citizens to request a denial of the application as opposed to an indefinite deferral (which could be picked back up) and removal of any approvals, such as the change in the RPA delineation and Preliminary Letters of Certification regarding the site’s septic system suitability.

It is our understanding that only the Board of Supervisors (BOS) would have the authority to require another RPA Delineation Study be completed in order to correct inaccuracies submitted by the applicant’s December 31, 2018, RPA Delineation Study.  We’re hopeful that such a motion would subsequently be considered by the BOS.  Please email the Planning Commission (Plancom@fairfaxcounty.gov) making these requests. 

  The Hunters Valley Association (HVA) encourages everyone’s attendance at the September 12th hearing.  No public comments will be allowed, the decision will be made promptly at 7:30, then feel free to leave. By your attendance, the Commissioners will see the public’s ongoing high level of interest and concern in this inappropriate and inaccurate application.

           See also this InsideNOVA article on the hearing regarding this proposed development. 

URGENT: Community Meeting Tonight on Massive Redevelopment at Wiehle and Sunrise Valley

Your support is needed at a community meeting this evening (Monday) at 7PM in the North County Government Center to discuss the massive redevelopment proposed at the southeast corner of Wiehle Avenue and Sunrise Valley Drive.  

TF Cornerstone is proposing three new buildings on this property, to include a 29-story residential building, a 14-story commercial building, and an 8-story residential building; the two smaller buildings currently on the property will remain.  The 29-story and 14-story buildings will dwarf the neighborhoods at this intersection, as they are immediately across the street from single family homes and multiple townhouse clusters.

If approved and built, this development will house over 2,600 new residents and employees, overwhelming an already-packed Sunrise Valley Drive.  There simply are no/no road improvements that could even remotely address this increased level of traffic density.  Eastbound traffic on Sunrise Valley is already so backed up in late afternoon that it's nearly impossible to turn out of the Upper Lake Drive on either of its intersections with SVR.  (Upper Lake is a horseshoe-shaped road.)  

TF Cornerstone has invited all affected neighbors to a community meeting on Monday, August 26 at 7 PM at the North County Government Center community room (1801 Cameron Glen Drive in Reston.   If you know of other individuals or groups who would be interested in engaging on this proposal, please feel free to forward this post to them.

The company is already on the Fairfax Planning Commission's schedule for a public hearing on September 25, 2019 and has told residents that it is working to schedule a Board of Supervisors public hearing on October 15, 2019. A copy of the development plan and proffer statement for the rezoning application are included, below.  
 

https://liquidfiles.cooley.com/link/Z0X56q7bKVVyOMTQpI0ni6
https://liquidfiles.cooley.com/link/Gex8fsJlSpT3PxZmSVGGZb

In addition, there are two posts on Nextdoor by Upper Lake neighbors who met with RA and with TF Cornerstone's land-use attorney that provide additional background info for you (see links below).  It is useful to note that one of my Upper Lake neighbors replied on Nextdoor that she had never gotten a notice from TF Cornerstone about this meeting.

Meeting with TFC's attorney

Meeting with RA

A Brief Look at Fairfax County Efforts to Reduce Residents' Participation in Land Use Planning & Approval Decisions

As we pass through the pre-election doldrums of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, we should all understand that both the current and the prospective County Board are in the process of reducing our involvement in critical land use decisions from community planning to project approval consideration.   We don’t yet know if Democratic Board candidate Walter Alcorn, almost certainly Hunter Mill District’s next supervisor, will be swept up in this drive despite his campaign commitment to involve the community.  (His website promises to “Engage the Community to Plan and Approve Projects that Make Sense.”)

This drive to accelerate county land use decisions in part by reducing public involvement began with Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova.  The Board’s frenzy for rapid, unfettered urban development goes back to at least 2012.  In a report on a February 2012 Board retreat, the Washington Post noted, 

“County officials outlined the need to rewrite the rules that govern land-use decisions, an effort backed by Bulova. She said that the current process, which allows for intense deliberation and wide public involvement, was better suited to the days when much of the county was farmland.

Today, Bulova said, Fairfax is a more urban and densely populated suburb and requires a more flexible approach that encourages redevelopment, particularly in areas targeted for intense growth, but preserves public engagement.”

“Preserves public engagement” is what one calls lip service that meets the legally required minimum public involvement in land use decisions.  

With that encouragement, the Board proceeded “to rewrite the rules that govern land-use decisions.”  So far, the county has made the following changes:

Fairfax Forward.  This Board planning initiative began shortly after the Board’s retreat.  The initiative aimed to correct what was viewed as a too rigid parcel-specific development nominations process that only marginally involved the community.   

Yet, as the Annandale blog reported, “A staff report on Fairfax Forward issued in February (2013) ‘was disturbingly silent on several critical avenues of citizen and community involvement in reviewing land use proposals,’ states (the Providence District Council) PDC’s comments. “Without amended language to ensure full and meaningful community review, PDC fears that Fairfax Forward could be construed in a way that reduces, rather than expands, community involvement in charting Fairfax’s future.”  In 2016, the county staff acknowledged, “(o)utstanding questions about community participation in (the) process,” but claimed the new system provided a “(c)learer process for citizen participation.”  No changes to improve opportunities for community involvement were added.  

“Minor Modifications”.   In its first step, the Department of Planning and Zoning (DPZ)  developed a “streamlined” process for handling “minor” changes in zoning decisions that the Board approved in 2017.   From a resident’s perspective, there are several points that stand out:

• There is no requirement that the county notify the community or even adjoining property owners about proposed zoning changes, only the district supervisor.
• There is no Planning Commission review, much less a public hearing, on the proposed changes, only a staff review.
• In the Reston Planned Residential Community (PRC), the Board of Supervisors may approve, without a public hearing, proposed development changes, including dropping recreation uses to the minimum legally required, eliminating “ineffective or obsolete” technological or service proffers (Why would a developer proffer “ineffective or obsolete” technology or services—and why would the county accept them?), and changing architectural design. 

All these changes are not supposed to “materially affect” the proposed development, but, of course, there is no definition of “materially affect?”

In short, the community is cut out of any opportunity for contribution to—even of knowledge of-- potentially important changes in a standing zoning decision concerning the development of a Reston property.  Anything done without full public scrutiny is incredibly dangerous.

The 2016 Gartner Report.  To bolster its Fairfax Forward initiative, the Board engaged yet another consultant in 2015, Gartner Group, to conduct “an independent review of current procedures and processes, effectiveness and efficiencies to identify opportunities for improvement which can further customer service and improve operational execution.”  The “customers” are “land use development customers, from home owners to large-scale developers.”  There is little room for residents or communities, who comprise more than one million people and hundreds of thousands of homeowners, in the considerations of this report.  

Gartner’s final report is all about achieving Goal #3 of the county’s 2015 strategic economic development plan:  “Improve the speed, consistency, and predictability of the Development Review Process.”  Nothing in the report considers the impact of the plans—whether community or specific development plans--on the communities in which the development is to occur.  Moreover, the proposed processes pay only lip service to public participation, limiting them to state-mandated requirements and the minimal limits of political propriety.  

zMOD Zoning Ordinance Re-write.   And then came “zMod,” the county’s ongoing process to re-write the county’s zoning ordinances.  The major assignment Clarion Group is tackling is a complete re-write of the county’s zoning ordinance, including streamlining processes, without making substantive changes in the ordinance.   Clarion presented its first draft of the substance of the proposed re-write on July 1, 2019.  There are, in fact, substantive changes laid out in the draft’s summary covering accessory uses, electrical vehicle charging, and much more.  (We strongly encourage you to read at least the summary of this draft report where the key changes are outlined.)  On the other hand, there is no discussion of the process by which one legislates changes to that ordinance, including the role of public input.   

Among the changes permitted in PRCs, including Reston, the zMOD draft newly permits new “live-work development” and “stacked townhouse” uses and excludes “community swim, tennis, and other recreational uses.” These beg questions regarding what the DRB will think of stacked townhouses and the future of that county regional recreation center that is supposed to be built in Reston.  Also, the proposal to not allow recreational facilities puts Reston’s two golf courses in jeopardy.  Certainly there will be much more to come, and we doubt that much of it will be to Reston’s advantage or promote its residents’ involvement.

It is vital that all Reston residents understand the proposed PRC zoning ordinance changes and their implications for our community.  There is much to be concerned about.  More broadly, we need to understand what changes, if any, are on the docket for the process for developing, vetting, and approving PRC zoning changes.  It was only because of a huge community effort involving literally hundreds, even thousands, of Restonians that we were able to postpone indefinitely consideration of the recent Reston PRC zoning ordinance amendment that would have allowed unconscionable increases in our population.  

One encouraging sign is that activists from all over the county are now organizing.  Citizens from ALL Fairfax County districts are becoming increasingly alarmed at the county’s rush to approve development everywhere with reduced citizen review.  The 2016 Gartner report has been read and raises huge concerns.  It seems to be THE blueprint designed for and by developers at the expense of true public input.

Any county effort to reduce community involvement in the zoning amendment process will only make it that much more difficult for us to stop truly bad county decisions that would undermine the goals and principles of our master planned community.

April-May Contributions and Expenditures of Hunter Mill District Supervisor Candidates

Below for your information is a summary table of the contributions to and expenditures by each of the five candidates running for Hunter Mill District Supervisor.  The data is compiled by the Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP).  More detailed information on each candidate's campaign funding may be found by clicking on the candidate's name.  

We would note that Maggie Parker, who works for Comstock Holdings, raised nearly eight times as much money and spent nearly five times as much money as her closest funding competitor, Walter Alcorn.  RestonNow has an article on Ms. Parker's funding sources here.

Contributions to and Expenditures by Hunter Mill District Supervisor Candidates, April 1-May 30, 2019
Source:  Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP)
	Walter Alcorn	Laurie Dodd	Shyamali Hauth	Parker Messick	Maggie Parker
Starting Balance	$44,942	$6,430	$5,459	$1,732	$0
Type of Receipt
Cash Contributions More than $100	$28,930	$5,150	$6,172	$0	$155,375
Cash Contributions of $100 or Less	$2,396	$2,135	$3,599	$155	$5,449
In-Kind Contributions More than $100	$448	$0	$0	$0	$93,452
In-Kind Contributions of $100 or Less	$0	$0	$95	$0	$0
Loans Received	$0	$2,000	$2,500	$0	$0
Miscellaneous Receipts	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Receipts 4/1/2019-5/30/2019	$31,774	$9,285	$12,366	$155	$254,276
Type of Expense
Itemized Expenses	$49,446	$11,246	$10,399	$848	$148,967
In-Kind Expenses	$448	$0	$95	$0	$93,452
Loans Repaid	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Surplus Funds	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0
Expenses 4/1/2019-5/30/2019	$49,894	$11,246	$10,494	$848	$242,420
Ending Balance on May 30, 2019	$26,821	$4,468	$7,331	$1,039	$11,856

Hunter Mill District Supervisor candidates respond to CPR questionnaire

Enclosed below are the verbatim responses of the five Hunter Mill District Supervisor candidates to the questionnaire circulated by the Coalition for a Planned Reston (CPR).   They are arranged in alphabetical order.  Here is the table of contents:

p.1     Walter Alcorn

p.4     Laurie Dodd

p.7     Shyamali Hauth

p.9     Parker Messick

p.12   Maggie Parker

   Hunter Mill Supervisor Candidates' Statements to CPR 6.19 by TerryMaynard on Scribd

CPR sends important issue questionnaire to all Hunter Mill District supervisor candidates.

Coalition for a Planned Reston Candidate Questionnaire

Please answer each question and, if desired, provide explanations in a brief statement following all of the questions and answers.

1.  The Fairfax County Planning Commission voted unanimously to reject a proposal to increase the population cap in Reston's Planned Residential Community (PRC) areas to a number greater than 13 persons per acre.  The Board of Supervisors then voted unanimously to "indefinitely defer" action on this proposal.  

            Do you agree with the Planning Commission that there should be no increase in the overall density of the PRC?    YES___    NO____

2.  The Reston Master Plan specifically supports there being two full sized (18 hole) golf courses in Reston.  Fairfax County guidelines also call for at least two golf courses in Reston.  

            Do you support maintaining a firm and unwavering line on maintaining existing zoning laws that will ensure Reston has adequate open space, specifically to include two 18-hole golf courses?    YES___    NO___

3.  The Fairfax County Master Plan specifically emphasizes the vital need for citizen input on land use issues.  

            Do you support having a balanced composition (local private citizens and local business persons) to any task force, working group or similar committee dealing with land use and development matters?   YES___ NO___

4.  In recent years a number of development applications have requested and been granted waivers to zoning and other regulations and guidelines meant to promote safety, accessibility, and the quality of life and esthetics of Reston. This has resulted in the loss of open space, crowded roadways, noise and light pollution and unaesthetic buildings.  

            Do you support the elimination of granting such waivers as a matter of common practice and requiring strict compliance with building and zoning ordinances to preserve the essential nature of Reston and the remainder of Fairfax County?     YES___   NO___

5. A position on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors is a demanding and time -consuming undertaking.

If you are elected to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors will you resign from all other jobs and make the County Supervisor position your exclusive and full-time job?   YES___   NO___

6. One of the key concerns for residents of Reston and the Hunter Mill District more generally is the delay between the approval of developments and the availability of funding and implementation of planned infrastructure and schools to support the increased number of residents associated with the approved developments.

If you are elected to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors will you support legislation by the Virginia General Assembly to authorize Fairfax County to more effectively maintain infrastructure in phase with development?   YES___   NO___

Candidate’s Statement (optional):