tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6246743662284890173.post6896365228839274048..comments2023-09-16T04:58:07.261-04:00Comments on the Annandale Blog: Seven Corners residents: Fix roads before approving redevelopmentAnnandale Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07543558586252790593noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6246743662284890173.post-22236454134745958322014-08-16T11:01:44.158-04:002014-08-16T11:01:44.158-04:00The pols get their "easy money" campaign...The pols get their "easy money" campaign funds from the developers, not we the people. Guess who's interests are likely to be accommodated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6246743662284890173.post-52977487010481669372014-08-15T12:21:15.863-04:002014-08-15T12:21:15.863-04:00If this plan goes thru...you might as well take ou...If this plan goes thru...you might as well take out of storage the 19 classroom trailers that were needed in the over crowded school! This project must include some land use for a new elementary school! This project is much to dense...more green space is needed!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6246743662284890173.post-64155012380322178852014-08-15T09:08:48.200-04:002014-08-15T09:08:48.200-04:00"Foulger-Pratt’s original plan called for abo..."Foulger-Pratt’s original plan called for about 50 townhouses and nearly 800 apartment units. Dick Knapp of Foulger-Pratt, who serves on the task force, said he is willing to reduce the density and include more townhouses, but cautioned against limiting the size of the project so much that it won’t be economically feasible."<br /><br />Please remember that Foulger Pratt's original plan is not the Task Force's original plan. Foulger Pratt joined the TF in late in the game. The TF original density numbers included much more mixed use (retail and office) and less residential. So to characterize the situation as if Foulger Pratt is compromising is not accurate-- Foulger Pratt came late into the game, as I said, and significantly changed the numbers, all but eliminating mixed use and making the development virtually all residential. This is economically feasible, yes, but what that means is that it will yield Foulger Pratt the greatest profit. <br /><br />The developers are driving the bus, here. And the TF is nodding along in agreement.<br /><br />We need the developers to build, of course, but it is not responsible development to let the developers drive this whole project -- their only interest is their self-interest which is their profit. This is no secret. <br /><br />However, it is the TF and the County's responsibility to also take into account the community's best interests before a decision is made. And they are not doing this. <br /><br />Shame on them.Mason Districthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00364201058329005162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6246743662284890173.post-57710513667023492662014-08-15T08:54:28.751-04:002014-08-15T08:54:28.751-04:00"The task force will take a formal vote on a ..."The task force will take a formal vote on a plan for the Sears site at its next meeting, but all members present last night favored the third the option, proposed at the last meeting by Mark Silverwood calling for 385,000 square feet of multifamily housing (about 465 apartments), 100 townhouses, and 34,000 square feet of retail."<br /><br />I think your numbers are wrong, Ellie. The total development at the Sears parcel will be 719,000sf, which will include, per the third option endorsed by Dick Knapp and rubber-stamped by TF Chairman John Thillman, the following:<br />220,000 sf townhomes (100 units @2,000sf each)<br />465,000 sf multi family (465 units @1,000sf each)<br />34,000 sf retail (no office)<br /><br />This is a HUGE departure from the November 2013 charette numbers, endorsed June 23 by Chairman Thillman:<br /><br />220,000 sf townhomes (110 units @2,000sf each)<br />165,000 sf multi family (165 units @1,000sf each)<br />134,000 sf retail<br />200,000 sf office/hotel<br /><br />The total square footage is the same, 719,000sf, but the make up is vastly different. With most of the DC metro area on vacation during the month of August, it is glaring that the TF and the county are trying to cram this through, by changing their own processes and voting on this at the next TF meeting, August 26.<br /><br />Community members are meeting with Penny Gross, Mason District Supervisor, to express our disappointment and resolve to not let this be railroaded through. <br /><br />The developers are the only ones who will benefit from this vote and this high residential density. They argue that they will not be able to find tenants for office/retail space, but the current buildings are 90% occupied, so clearly, Seven Corners does not suffer from the same lack of office/retail tenants that they argue the rest of the county is experiencing. <br /><br />Community members are furious.Mason Districthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00364201058329005162noreply@blogger.com