Viewpoint: The Willow Run project should not go forward
By Randy Noranbrock, president of the Willow Run Civic Association
Residents of the Willow Run community in Annandale urge the Fairfax County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to reject a nomination to the Comprehensive Plan for a five-story, 186-unit apartment building at 6675 Little River Turnpike.
This nomination has drawn the condemnation of all members of the Willow Run Civic Association. The Pinecrest Community Association also opposes the nomination.
When the Planning Commission takes up this proposal on June 4 as part of the Site-Specific Plan Amendment (SSPA) process, there are no other acceptable motions than a motion to not proceed with this nomination.
An online petition opposing this project has been signed by 345 people, most of whom live in Willow Run and the surrounding area. Residents of our neighborhood are extremely dissatisfied with the way this nomination has been handled to date.
It has been less than two years since a Comprehensive Plan amendment was submitted for this same parcel. The previous submission, in 2023, requested a change of the Comprehensive Plan to allow a high-density mixed-use building with 105 residential units and 18,000 square feet of retail. That submission was rejected by the Planning Commission and did not move forward in the SSPA process.
Related story: Planning Commission agrees to consider plan amendment nominations
The current submission for this parcel is now requesting an even larger, higher-density project with 186 residential units and 16,714 square feet of commercial/retail uses in a five-story building.
This would nearly double the proposal submitted in 2023. Fairfax County planning staff recommended in 2023 that this project not be included in the Comprehensive Work Program “for a number of reasons, including site limitations that would limit the ability to provide adequate buffering opportunities to the adjacent uses.”
According to staff, “There was a significant increase in density and the location of the site was wedged between two existing activity centers.”
During the Planning Commission’s workshop on March 9, 2023, no one spoke in favor of the nomination. Willow Run residents raised concerns about traffic, parking, stormwater runoff, other environmental impacts, and incompatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.
The nominator has not addressed any of those issues, despite having had a full two years to do so. In fact, the current submission would exacerbate the density issue tremendously.
Further, the nominator failed to address those concerns at a community meeting arranged by Mason Supervisor Andres Jimenez on Sept. 4, 2024. The purpose of the meeting was for the supervisor to receive community feedback regarding the parcel. However, surprisingly, the supervisor sat at the front of the room with the nominator’s counsel by his side, and the nominator sat at the back of the room. The Pinecrest Community and others appear to not have been invited to this meeting.
Willow Run residents provided the supervisor with feedback and suggestions and received no reply from the nominator. The nominator also failed to address any of the concerns raised during the SSPA community meeting on April 21 of this year.
Based on the present submission, the nominator heard none of what was said and has demonstrated an unwillingness to work with the community at all. The nominator has not reached out to the neighborhood nor its civic association nor any of the surrounding homeowners’ associations to even attempt to address our concerns.
This nominator has had several years and two formal public process opportunities to come up with a viable plan, based on land use requirements, and has ultimately failed to do so. The nominator has also failed to perform basic outreach to the neighboring residents and immediately adjacent community associations, including Willow Run and Pinecrest.
As stated by other planning commissioners during the recent May 22 Planning Commission workshop, this nomination is out of place with the surrounding neighborhood and would be appropriate in the Annandale Business Center. The county’s Comprehensive Plan contemplates such density in designated business centers and not as infill for residential neighborhoods such as ours.
As my neighborhood stated before, there is no need to waste further time and money investigating this nomination. There has been no change in the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise to merit even considering this nomination.
It is basic common sense that if the prior nomination was rejected, the current submission, which is nearly twice the size, should also be rejected. There is no need to waste the Planning Commission’s or staff’s time and energy investigating a nomination that should never have been submitted in the first place.
Further, it constitutes an ongoing complete waste of taxpayer funds to even continue to entertain this nomination.
As such, this nomination should be rejected.
Development at all costs, costs us all.
38 responses to “Viewpoint: The Willow Run project should not go forward”
Leave a reply
What a great article. I totally agree with everything posted and add we are a multi-generational neighborhood, pleading with the commission to take our input seriously, for the safety of our children, grandchildren and seniors living on our streets. Our road (Randolph Dr) is already dangerous and the proposed building, if allowed to proceed, would unnecessarily endanger pedestrians and vehicles alike.
Great article
Deny this proposal
This proposal is absolutely not the appropriate use of this site. Commissioners who have driven to and visited the site have seen for themselves how incompatible it is with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses. Also they agreed that this project would bring too much traffic to already congested and unsafe residential roads. I encourage Commissioners and supervisors to do the same and visit the site so that they may see for themselves what they are voting on.
PLEASE, Supervisor Jimenez…
Listen to YOUR constituents, YOUR community, YOUR voters. We voted you into office because you said YOU would listen to the Mason District community and make a difference. In this nomination, our community has clearly and passionately made the case as to why it should not move forward in the SSPA process. This nominator has ignored this community since he purchased the property in 2021. By allowing this nomination to move forward, you are rewarding TERRIBLE behavior and setting a TERRIBLE precedent that exploitative developers can eventually get what they want by PLAYING THE LONG GAME. Please do not be fatigued by the current lack of development on this site.
YES, this highly visible site needs to be redeveloped but there are rational reasons why it has stayed undeveloped for so long. The primary reason being that the land was Listed For Sale by the previous owner for 12 years (2009-2021). The site stayed unsold for that long because nobody would come near the unjustifiable asking price of $3.0 million… that is, until the nominator arrived and bought it with the cavalier assumption that his purchase price could be economically feasible once he garnered Mason District/Fairfax County leaders’ support for this monstrous, out-of-place mixed-use development.
Supervisor Jimenez… Please show the courage and foresight to dismiss this nomination from moving forward. YOUR community needs you to use common sense and sound judgment.
YES, this site needs to be redeveloped and WE WILL GET THERE but it is the Site Owner’s responsibility to MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY (Mason District, Willow Run, Pinecrest, Indian Run, etc.) and work through a sensible plan that all of us can rally around . As Randy Noranbrock so articulately expressed in his VIEWPOINT article – Development At All Costs, Costs Us All.
This monstrosity doesn’t belong outside of the Annandale Business Center!
100% agree. The nominator’s site proposal is incompatible with the site size and location and exacerbates pre-existing issues of cut-through traffic and stormwater runoff. I am also strongly opposed to this proposal.
I really hope the Board of Supervisors listens to the community on this one. This whole proposal is bogus.
This nomination should be rejected for all the reasons stated in the article above ! The congestion and traffic would be horrible, it would also cause overcrowding in schools and storm water/flooding would be devastating to the homes within the neighborhood! Further, with such a monstrosity, all kinds of unforeseen environmental concerns would inevitably appear. This large density project is not the right fit for this site !
I voted for Supervisor Jimenez to use ‘good judgement’ to make Mason District better! Moving this nomination forward is NOT good judgment. We taxpayers should not bear the burden of coming up with a development plan. That is the responsibility of the owner. He has proven not to be supportive of our community ! I do not support this nomination at all.
Mason Supervisor Andres Jimenez is trying hard to be a one term failure.
The ramifications of improper land use and poor urban planning such as that in the nomination will hurt surrounding neighborhoods and this county for decades to come.
The question is, why does a proposal that called for 105 units plus retail that was rejected by the Planning Commission in 2023 isn’t now outright rejected , upon resurfacing with even more density at 186 units?
The Planning Staff recommended to the Commission that this proposal doesn’t move forward, and yet it is still being debated.
Nothing has changed in two years to allow this 68% increase at the expense of the well being of the adjacent neighborhoods. The proposed project belongs on a compatible commercial setting and not in a residential single family neighborhood.
Such a shame people want to keep us back in suburban exclusion and housing scarcity. Projects like these can make huge upgrades to the existing complaints, far more than letting this place degrade for centuries more
Interesting take, Am. Don’t see no-one urging for suburb exclusion or housing scarcity. You confused?
Nominator got stilted last time for asking for half a cow and now wants the other half and a pig, too.
Someone said the nominator got confused with his other nomination (Food Star @ Baileys) and thought this one was in a Community Business Center, too. Doh. Dumbass.
This is not about suburban exclusion and housing scarcity. The developer is more than welcome to put housing that is appropriate for the size of the lot as well as one that fits within the existing neighborhood. Fairfax County has designated two Community Business Centers in Annandale for increased development and housing and there are already nominations to make that happen (CPN-2025-I-MA-010 & CPN-2025-I-MA-050). Please do not make broad comments such as this without understanding the nuances and particularities of each situation.
If ever there was a proposal that deserved to be rejected by County officials, it would be his one. I hope that County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor votes reflect a concern for the safety and well being of Fairfax County residents and taxpayers and not developers’ profit margins.
This project belongs in a more commercial area, such as Downtown Annandale, which can more than handle this type of development. No one is denying the need for more housing, but placing such a large development on a tiny lot in a residential area which cannot handle the volume of traffic this would bring is irresponsible and a slap in the face to all the residents and Planning Commission members who have opposed it in the past and present.
Supervisor Jimenez, are you listening to your constituents or to the developer??
This nomination doesn’t make any sense and it’ll be really suspicious if it goes through now after being rejected 2 years ago with half the density. Follow the money!
I am absolutely opposed to this development. It’s not at all consistent with area/neighborhoods. That stretch of 236 already has too much traffic. Also the feeder schools are currently over crowded!
I’m absolutely opposed to this project. I was also opposed to the last project which was smaller than this one and voted down. This makes absolutely no sense that now, a much larger project is even being considered. This will greatly impact the Little River Turnpike area.
This is way too large a project for this particular corner. That parcel needs to be redeveloped but not with a large apartment building – it would lead to major congestion.
Bad idea
As I responded to a naysayer’s comment above… we in the community are not opposed to housing. But to push through development without considering the context of each site, something the community are experts in, would damage us all. The developer has not once reached out to the community themselves to make sincere efforts in listening to our concerns. Supervisor Jimenez in his newly elected position seems overzealous in trying to push this through where his predecessor Penny Gross wisely listened to the community (and she even pushed through the Callaway development and many others!).
Annandale is already crowded and traffic is an issue at times. It makes no sense to put that kind of unit on such a small space where more cars and people will be situated. Columbia Road is a neighborhood. Who wants a tall apartment complex over shadowing their homes. This is a very poor plan and should be tossed. Build it some where else!
This project is deeply flawed and fundamentally incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood and businesses. It should never have progressed to this stage. Despite opposition from the Planning Staff, it continues to move forward, even though its scale and character are clearly inappropriate for the area.
Our community already faces crowded roads and overburdened schools. Anyone who lives here is aware of the frequent and serious accidents that occur on Little River Turnpike. In the previous approval cycle, the Planning Commission rightly rejected a smaller version of this project. Yet the developer has returned with an even more burdensome proposal, which remains under consideration.
The Commission has heard the overwhelming concerns of residents—those who would suffer the most from the negative impacts of this development. Given that the proposal is inconsistent with sound zoning principles, one must ask: why is it still being seriously considered?
Listen to us. Do not let this proposal go forward. This is a horrible plan. Does not belong in our neighborhood.
This is much too small a parcel for a project this size. That lot needs redeveloping but not with an apartment building. The traffic and congestion would be a major problem.
Bad idea.
I agree with everything said in the article. Our community is very active and we walk on our streets every day. We walk for fitness. We walk our dogs. We push baby carriages. We also walk to visit with our neighbors. More than one hundred, eighty (180) new housing units would add a lot of new traffic to our streets and I am very concerned for our safety if this project is allowed to go forward.
I hope the planning commission listens to us and the board of supervisors rejects the nomination. They can do better.
Why am I not surprised by the lack of any county official to actually use there heads, not to mention common sense. Since when does a high rise building belong in a residential neighborhood with all single family homes in it?
I guess if the county approves this asinine development, then I guess Randolph drive transitions from a two lane residential street to a 4 lane thoroughfare.
Traffic is relatively heavy already, with or without the speed bumps.
My wife & I picked this neighborhood for a reason, this development should make everyone sell due to the lack of county officials intelligence.
As a long-time resident of Annandale, I strongly oppose the proposed Willow Run development. Put simply, this project is too large in scale for the designated site and would negatively impact neighbors in the surrounding areas significantly. Not only would the added density worsen traffic along Little River Turnpike, but key concerns around stormwater management and lack of adequate buffering have yet to be addressed. Many in the community have voiced similar feedback, and I hope that our collective input will carry the weight it deserves.
This project would completely change much of what we love so much about our neighborhood. I urge the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to seek a solution that respects the integrity and wishes of our well-established community.
Having lived in this neighborhood for 28 years, I can attest to the increasing, dangerous traffic we already suffer and concur this nomination absolutely should not be approved. Traffic is only one issue. There are a myriad of other negative impacts to the surrounding area/neighborhood that others have previously commented on. I kindly request that Supervisor Jiminez and others vote this site development as currently presented does not proceed.
It would be fantastic to get rid of these eyesores. Whatever replacement would be a huge upgrade!
I too am a longtime resident of Annandale and have lived within the Willow Run neighborhood most of my life. I STRONGLY OPPOSE the plans for this development. Previous comments have pointed out that two years ago, the same developer (George H) put forth a plan to build 105 units plus retail and it was widely rejected. In two short years, that developer has NOT ONCE met with the members of this community to work together and build a better plan. In fact, we’ve never met or talked with him…ever.
Now he wants to build an even bigger, 186 unit monstrosity in this lot? How is this proposal even close to moving forward? Why did Supervisor Jimenez vote yes in the preliminary hearings if he knows the history of this property and the fact that the developer has NEVER bothered to meet with the community? All of these reasons are major red flags.
I’m curious if this developer has contributed to the political campaigns of the board…that can only be the logical reason why this vote is hanging in the balance.
I hope those members that abstained in the preliminary vote truly do their homework and listen to the voices on this thread. The proof is firmly there, this is NOT the right plan for development. Let’s work together and find the right one…like a community is supposed to.
This site should not be overbuilt upon! For all of the reasons stated in this article, it is an unthinkable mistake to build this many housing units in this particular location. A brief site visit explains it all. You don’t even need to get out of your car to see how completely inappropriate this location is for this type of project, just drive by it and see! Reject this ludicrous plan which would ruin the surrounding neighborhoods. This development isn’t progress, it’s greed and subterfuge personified.
As a mother of two young boys living on Randolph Dr, this proposal does not sit well with me. The resulting traffic down Randolph will be a nightmare, with several blind corners and narrow lanes. Not only do children play in the street here, but TJ students take weekly walks for biology class to study the creek (traveling the longest portion of Randolph on foot), TJ and surrounding schools’ cross country teams run up and down the road multiple times a week, and the road is getting more and more young families with children as each year passes. I am aware that I’m not entitled to a lovely sleepy road just because we thought we were moving to one 6 years ago, but after a really long-fought battle to get speed bumps put in the neighborhood, this feels like a step in the wrong direction. A few large homes or townhomes built on the proposed lot would surely provide the developer with significant investment returns that would actually benefit the community rather than worsen it. The space available is too small, the adjacent streets are too narrow and unsafe for heavier traffic, and the adjacent business areas are also too small as it is.
Please, please reject this nomination. I’m happy to chat with anyone who might want an inside view into the neighborhood! Thank you for understanding this worried parent’s concerns!
One only needs to drive down this section of Little River Turnpike to understand that the scale and compatibility of this project is way off.
I signed the petition, and strongly oppose this development. I live off of Old Columbia Pike, and there are no sidewalks, a decent amount of pedestrian traffic, and more than enough vehicle traffic. This is wildly inappropriate without fixes to the existing neighborhood.
I’ve lived on Randolph Dr. for 28 years. The proposed development is way too dense for the surrounding area. I am unsure how this new proposal is even being considered when a less dense proposal failed two years ago. One has to wonder why Supervisor Jimenez is moving this proposal forward without regard to the neighborhood or his constituents.
Please reject this proposal.
This is the best article about this topic in long time, if ever, and I have followed this issue since the beginning. I live in The Pinecrest and have four almost 40 years. Someone email this to all the BOS with all the comments. I find this latest modification and the support of the Mason district planner very suspicious. (See previous article about their involvement).