Mason District committee approves Skyline and McWhorter projects, rejects infill proposal
 |
| These buildings at the Skyline Center could be repurposed. |
The Mason District Land Use Committee (MDLUC) on July 7 endorsed proposals for a live/work project at the Skyline Center and townhouses in Annandale and opposed an infill development in the Alexandria area.
Both the Skyline and McWhorter Place projects will be heard by the Fairfax County Planning Commission on July 15 and the Board of Supervisors on July 28.
In the infill application, property owner Lora Seeds is seeking a waiver to build three houses on a 1.2-acre lot at 5824 Dawes Ave. in the Alexandria area of Mason District. The Planning Commission has scheduled a hearing on that application for July 8.
Seeds is seeking a special exception to waive minimum lot width requirements in order to build three single-family detached houses on a lot zoned for two houses. Seeds plans to sell the property to a builder, so a design of the houses isn’t available.
During the MDLUC meeting, the Hayes family expressed concerns over the new houses looming over their backyard and said the project would be more acceptable if there were more trees and if there were only two, instead of three, houses.
The Fairfax County planning and zoning staff recommended approval of the project. The MDLUC voted 6-1 to oppose it.
A live/work concept at Skyline
The Skyline project, submitted by developer Robert Seldin of Highland Square Holdings in partnership with the Wolff Co., calls for three mostly vacant office buildings at the Skyline Center in Bailey’s Crossroads to be converted to live/work units. Tenants would decide whether to use their unit as a residence, office, or both.
Seldin developed Mission Lofts at 5600 Columbia Pike in Bailey’s Crossroads and e-Lofts in Alexandria’s West End with the same concept.
The Skyline project would have 740 units – 240 per building – and one of the buildings could be age-restricted and aimed at retirees interested in doing consulting or other professional work from home.
“These are high-quality buildings with great access to downtown,” Seldin said. “and they’re in a federal Opportunity Zone, which makes them a big draw for small businesses.”
He said the project would “establish Bailey’s Crossroads as the innovation corridor for Fairfax County.”
Related story: Skyline live/work project moves forward
The project would include landscaping and other outdoor elements to make the property more inviting and engaging.
The developer agreed to contribute $681 per unit for Fairfax County Public Schools for capital improvements at schools within the “pyramid” serving the property.
Townhouses in Annandale
The Christopher Cos. are proposing 43 townhouses on 8.3 acres at the intersection of McWhorter Place and Markham Street in central Annandale.
The developer assembled nine parcels; four are vacant, and five have residences built between 1945 and 1950. One of the parcels – on the other side of McWhorter Place – is owned by Fairfax County and will become a small community park operated by the Fairfax County Park Authority.
 |
| The holdout property on McWhorter Place. |
Christopher Cos. was unable to purchase an additional .32-acre lot at the corner of McWhorter and Markham, even though the developer offered the owner twice the amount offered to the other property owners, said Clark Massie, of Tetra Corp., the developer’s real estate agent.
“The owner countered our proposal and wanted us to provide a housing unit for free and pay an additional monetary amount. We didn’t accept it,” Massie said. If that parcel becomes available later, he said, Christopher Cos. could build three townhouses on it.
The project includes five smaller workforce housing units that would be affordable to households earning up to 80 percent of the area median income.
Related story: More details emerge on Annandale townhouse proposal
In addition, 30 percent of the development would have open space. There would be two stormwater management facilities and park space within the community.
The applicant committed to proffer $233,000 for the school system and agreed to provide a crosswalk on McWhorter Place pending approval from VDOT.
20 responses to “Mason District committee approves Skyline and McWhorter projects, rejects infill proposal”
Leave a reply
A half million for FCPS seems low for adding 740 housing units.
The proffer system in Fairfax is completely untenable. Developers will almost never pay the full cost of their impacts. For those of you who can't abide by our current leaders, this one isn't their fault. Correcting this problem might solve a lot of people's complaints. Just saying.
Re the McWhorter/Markham proposal, I don't understand how a parcel owned by the county can be "assembled" by the developer. It sounds like the county and developer agreed that the developer would develop the park, to add to the public attractiveness of this proposal. Or, is this to be part of green space normally required for townhouse developments? — unlikely since the developer does not own/is not acquiring this parcel. Clarification would be appreciated.
Welcome to Fairfax County. The County has crawled into bed with the developers and is "limiting" public input. It will only get worse if people don't stop this. This, of course, is all under the "economic development" doctrine but is truly a way to feed the beast or to stimulate revenue. It's all about money and our BOS is willing to throw out the quality of life for the rest of us rather than let development happen gradually over time, they want it all. The cover of course is the "strategic plan" with its predetermined outcome of "economic development". They should go to jail just like they did in the 80's… history is repeating itself.
8:57- you are understanding this wrong. The developer purchased several adjacent parcels of land from private owners in order to assemble a contiguous development project. There was one holdout that they could not agree to sell which is unfortunate, but is their right. The development will therefore wrap around that property.
The only land that was county owned is on the other side of the street. The developer is not putting any apartments on that land, and that land is remaining county owned, however as part of the project the developer is building a public park that will then be maintained by the park authority.
11:08am… so, you think vacant and dilapidated buildings will lead to a higher quality of life than the buildings being replaced by townhomes, some of which are designated workforce affordable and the community getting a park? Interesting perspective.
Well thanks for asking. I'm not wild about this plan because of the traffic issues but I do recognize the need for redevelopment. Frankly, the Skyline project is one I fully support. What I don't support is the underhanded way the Supervisors have used our tax dollars to conduct a study with no public input — the Gartner Report — the only participants were developers and have restructured the county to make developers dreams come true. Meanwhile, all of the development around Metro contains no affordable housing, and who would benefit more being near public transportation. We have 2 million square feet of empty office space in this county so let's build more in Tysons. "Streamlining" is a joke when all that is happening is to only benefit the developers and keep the public from having input. Now, with COVID and businesses rethinking commercial office space maybe we should keep building them…they are all empty. All of our precious natural resources are being hacked away so they can advertise what a great job they've done. So, tell me, have you been in those expensive apartments that look like boxes at the Metro? Have you noticed most of them have had to be rebuilt because of shoddy construction? Guess who pays for that? The HOA… the residents. Meanwhile the developer–many of whom belong to multi-national corporations–have long cashed their checks and have moved on to find their next pillage. They have no connection to the local communities and could care less about the character of the neighborhoods.
I would like to thank any and all builders who are willing to build and redevelop properties in Bailey's/7-corners. We are long overdue.
Now if can revive other stalled projects, Mill Creek/Moncure Ave./Sears, we can spur a real revilization of the area.
First thanks to Ellie for covering this issue. Real estate development en masse is the post-tobacco cash crop, the new Plantation Owner's Wet Dream. 8:48 PM, your perspective is appreciated. Why do we have such un-creative solutions in this state where we bulldoze every every green space we can find instead of investing in the skill sets people need to make a living in the 21st century?
“why do we have such uncreative solutions”… I find the skyline proposal in particular pretty creative, and they are adding more green than what is there now.
Regarding any of you who are complaining – I’m going to borrow a tactic from Darren Shumate who you will see on this blog from time to time and invite you to come and actually participate in the process. The mason district land use committee is made up of citizens and encourages civil input from the community and takes that input into account when making recommendations. You can find information about when our meetings are (I am a member of the committee) and how to attend (currently virtually via zoom) on the county’s website. https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/mason/mason-district-land-use-and-development
Thanks for the invitation. I am actively involved in the land use process on more levels than you are. What I see is frightening. Good for you being a member of the Mason district land use committee. I am a member of many committees and if you are aware of the issues going on shame on you for not bringing them to the public since they are being forced out of the process and most of them are completely unaware of that.
I’m calling your bluff anon and saying you aren’t a member of crap. If you were, you wouldn’t be commenting anonymously.
Then you would be wrong.
I don’t believe you, you just decided to make crap up to invalidate a perfectly well rationalized point from Jeff. It was the only option you had.
Frankly I don't care what you believe. Read for yourself, this has all happened and the public is being removed from the process:
Final version of the Gartner Report:
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/landdevelopment/sites/landdevelopment/files/assets/documents/pdf/nvbia/fairfax-vision-and-recommendations.pdf
Notice the Gartner Study Deliverables Noted in Red here – past agendas and ongoing “collaboration” apparent. Please note the "silent supporters" who are relatives and employees of the developer who will benefit from the development… set up to look like legitimate public input. The staff has ongoing meeting with the developers to be indoctrinated into this with the full support of our Board of Supervisors:
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/plan2build/nvbia-naiop-fairfax-committee-meetings
So, you’re complaining that the public is being removed from the process in a comment on an article that was written on 3 land use submissions that have been completely open to public input. ?
I am using every opportunity I can to let the public know "streamlining" is a key word for limiting public input and making the land development process go faster for the benefit of developers. Check out the County Execs strategic plan for example, there are numerous examples throughout that document on streamlining process for the benefit of the developers. These two projects simply presented the opportunity. I explained above that I'm not wild about the townhouses but I do applaud the redevelopment of Skyline and would like to see more of this type of redevelopment. Yes, public input is sought at this point, but as ZMOD roles out and the strategic plan is implemented the BOS is doing the bidding of the developers. Gartner was done in 2015. Since then, the entire county has been restructured to accommodate that, then the strategic planning process began asking for "public input" but I guarantee that effort had predetermined outcomes, priorities were "paired" to show that "economic development" was the outcome they were going for. Look, don't believe me, believe me… I don't have to justify why I do what I do. An opportunity presented itself and I took it. But you should know that staff now are rewarded not by the quality of their work but by the dollar amount of approvals they usher through. The envelope is being pushed on every application and the developers are feeling very empowered. The public is busy trying to keep their families afloat.
“But you should know that staff now are rewarded not by the quality of their work but by the dollar amount of approvals they usher through.” That is a seriously bold claim. If true, that would constitute a major conflict of interest. If false, you are degrading the work of civil servants.
Either directly back that up with direct and specific citations of proposed or in place county policy or I’m done entertaining this dialog.
I have given the link for the Gartner Report, I can't make you read it. If you look at the link for the Plan2Build ongoing meetings you will see the rewards system outlined there not to mention the "silent supporters"… employees and relatives of the developer who attend public meetings and testify but don't mention they will benefit from the development… designed to make it look like there are just differing opinions in the community. Do you watch the planning commission meetings? All of Gartner is being implemented. It took them 5 years. I've been told this directly by staff as well as hearing from very high level officials that this is what is happening now. Read the strategic plan… it is there. I can't make you read it but it is all there for you to see how streamlining will minimize public input. I think being done with this is a good idea. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. I totally respect the land use staff, they are the ones that told me the developers are "pushing the envelope". Read Gartner. It is all there.
Reference pages 75-78 in Gartner for the birth of the incentives for approvals. Do you understand who NVBIA & NAIOP are? And another connection… note the smiling Barbara Byron along with all the developers who are the same ones who were the only input into Gartner: https://business.gmu.edu/realestate/board/
I'm done.
You obviously care what we think because your still making absurd comments, anonymously. If you didn’t care, you wouldn’t be here.