2 December 2002 Sully District Land Use and Transportation Committee Report
by Jeff Parnes

  1. Attendance:

    1. Members: Dick Frank (TAC), Jim Hart (Virginia Run), Carol Hawn (Old Mill), Judith Heisinger (Bull Run CA), Mark McConn (Bull Run CA), Jeff Parnes (Chantilly Highlands), and Larry Tessier (Franklin Glen)

    2. Guests: Adam Volanth (Bohler Engineering), Jonathan & Margy Collom (Century Oaks), Phil Yates (Dewberry & Davis), Steve Wheeler (Fair Oaks Glen HOA), Tom Bolton, Jim Scott, Adrian Stanton (INOVA), Jim Rohls, Kevin Shreve, Terry Wingfield (McDonald's), Maryn & Tony Dorrzapf (NVCL), Ron Koch (Planning Commission), Georgette Kohler, Frank Ojeda (Rock Hill), Tom Scoggin, Terrell Spence (Rocky Run Assoc), Ken Rolfe (Stonehenge HOA), Glenn Ponsart, Cal & Jay Train (Stone Pond), Ralph Gay, Carol Hagen, Brian & Ellen Ver Planck (Sully Station II), Ted Troscianecki (Virginia Run), Tim Sampson (Walsh Colucci), Robin Antonucci, Long Cao (Wells & Associates), Andrew Girard (Westvale)

  2. Presentations:

    1. 7:30
      • Proponent: Molly E. Harbin, McGuireWoods, for McDonald's Corporation
      • Action: Special Exception Amendment to allow for a drive-through eating establishment in the C-6 Zoning District concurrently with a partial Proffered Condition Amendment to amend the governing proffers to allow for a drive-through other than a drive-through bank
      • Location: 1.022 acres located in the southern tip of the Sully Station II Shopping Center along Stone Road

      Essentially, McDonald’s needs to revise the proffers and file for an SEA to allow for a drive though fast food establishment in the Sully Station II shopping center. The following information was provided by the proponent:

      • McDonald's Corporation is filing a Special Exception Amendment to allow for a drive-through eating establishment in the C-6 Zoning District. The Special Exception Amendment is filed concurrently with a partial Proffered Condition Amendment to amend the governing proffers to allow for a drive-through other than a drive-through bank on a portion of Fairfax County Tax Map 54-1 ((17)) E (the "Property"). The Property consists of 1.022 acres and is located in the southern tip of the Sully Station II Shopping Center along Stone Road. The Property is currently governed by conditions approved under RZ 86-S-083 and SE 93-Y-046. The portion of the Shopping Center subject to the Special Exception Amendment and Proffered Condition Amendment is currently undeveloped.
      • Land across Stone Road to the west and southwest of the Property is developed with townhomes and is zoned PDH-4. Land to the east and southeast of the Property is zoned R-3 and PDH-3 and is developed with townhomes and single-family detached residential development. Land directly abutting the Property to the south is vacant. The Property is located in Land Unit G, Sub-unit G-2 of the Centreville Area of the Bull Run Planning District. The Comprehensive Plan recommends this portion of Sub-unit G-2 to be developed with neighborhood-serving commercial use. This proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the Property.
      • The facade of the proposed McDonald's will compliment the high architectural standards of the shopping center. The primary building material will be brick and of a color matching the shopping center. The roofing material will be standing seam metal and of a color matching the shopping center. McDonald's does not propose to use a monument sign but does propose building mounted signage as allowed by the Fairfax County Zoning Ordinance

      At the meeting Ms. Harbin explained that MacDonald's wanted to move the current in-line facility from the middle of the shopping center to the center's southern tip, south of the current southern access road. The free standing facility would have no direct access to Stone Road but be accessable from the existing entrance road.

      Although they had originally mentioned operating hours of 5 Am to 11 Pm, they agreed to limit operational hours to those in the shoppping center's proffered conditions of 6 Am to 10 Pm.

      Ms. Harbin explained that through their previous meetrings with the neighborhoods, they found that the major neighborhood concerns were lighting, traffic and trash. As the aim of the zoning approval process was to try to mitigate the citizen concerns, they were planning to meet on the site at 7 Pm on 7 Jan 03 to review lighting levels with a light meter. They also agreed that the lights on their parcels would be at the same level as currently exist at the shopping center.

    2. 9:00
      • Proponent: Fair Oaks Hospital, Tim Sampson from the law firm of Walsh, Colucci
      • Action: Amendment of proffers
      • Location: Fair Oaks Hospital

      Tim Samson, who had previously presented the plans for Fair Oaks Hospital expansion at the August meeting, returned to report on their discussions with local communities. The Planning Commission public hearing is Wednesday 4 December, with the Board of Supervisors hearing on 9 December.

      • INOVA is currently expanding the Fair Oaks Hospital complex. They’re building a third office building to the north of the hospital, adding two stories to the existing hospital (one story for expansion - 29,000 sq ft, and the other for mechanical equipment - which will be enclosed) and reorienting the hospital entrance to the west towards the relocated Joseph Sewick Drive and opposite the new office building.

      • They plan on expanding the third office building from 60,000 sq ft to 90,000 by enlarging its footprint, with no height change.

      • The first of two parking structure is being built. It will be five-levels and 45 feet high with the lowest level below ground. It will contain 950 parking spaces, with another 100 surface spaces being built to make up for those lost while building the elevated structure. They have softened the western face (the side visible by their neighbors) of the parking garage.

      • The have request to remove a fence between them and the neighborhood on their north based on the neighborhood’s request.

      • They will add an entrance sign at Joseph Sewick Drive and Ox Trail.

      • They could not commit to the expense of a covered walkway was (estimated at $200,000) from the parking structure to the hospital.

      • With the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the FAR from 2 to 3, the additions planned and underway will bring the hospital site to a FAR of 2.2.

      • Although staff has asked the hospital to donate several parcels between Alder Woods Drive and the Fairfax County Parkway, to do so would remove the possibility of constructing an emergency access from the Parkway, and although the hospital has no plans to do so currently, they are loath to remove the possibility in the future.

      • Lines of sights prospective were shown which indicated that from most neighboring residences the hospital’ s building would be at an elevation of below 7 degrees, with 14 degrees the usual value for neighborhoods adjoining office complexes.

      The committee’s comments included:

      • As there will be parking on the roof of the parking structure, there needs to be a way to prevent vehicle lighting, as well as any lighting on the top of the structure, from impacting their neighbors.

      • The lack of the covered walkway, considering the overall cost of the expansion, is a disappointment. The hospital plans on offering free valet parking from the hospital and office buildings.

      • Trees were cut down to create a storm water retention site which now allows the facility to be seen unobstructed from the Fairfax County Parkway, which had never been before. The county has asked the hospital for additional plantings in the storm water management area that they feel are unnecessary.

      • Although they are widening Rugby Road, and installing a light at Rugby Road and Alder Woods Drive intersection, the northern approach at Ox Trail and West Ox Road needs to be improved as well. They plan on asking WMATA to have buses serving the hospital to enter and exit at the Alder Woods intersection rather on Ox Trail.

      Local communities commented on the hospital’s willingness to work with them.

      The committee recommended unanimously that the Planning Commission approve the Special Exception subject to the development conditions being acceptable to staff. Additionally, the committee:

      • Does not oppose the applicants positions on the park lots, storm water management and emergency access to the parkway

      • Takes no position on the planting in the bottom of the storm water pond

      • Encourages them to continue to address the issue of protection of pedestrians from the weather.

  3. Old Business:

    1. Dick Frank indicated that with the postponement of plans to improve Centreville Road, the Wall Road left turn lane may be considered for a spot improvement by staff. It had been so considered four or so years ago, but had been removed when VDOT was planning to improve the road in 2005. Dick is still have the opinion that the Centreville Road improvements may be accomplished as part of the Route 28 Private/Public partnership agreed upon this year.

    2. Ron Koch indicated that Louis Glickfield, Marlo Furniture’s owner, had asked him to postpone his decision on the Marlo out-of-turn Plan Amendment. The amendment would allow them to build a furniture store west of the EQC on land that is currently planned for tourist serving uses. Mr. Glickfield asked for the opportunity to present to Ron and other Sully land use activists “an offer they couldn’t refuse.” Ron indicated that Supervisor Frey’s staff would set up the meeting and representatives of the SDC LU&T, WFCCA and others would be invited.

  4. New Business:

    1. Although Pulte is applying for state and federal permits to discharge fill material into Bull Run from the Cedar Crest property, just west of Fairfax National Estates, they are just disturbing the wetlands and replanting the area. The permit title is itself misleading. Jean Richardson of the county staff has reviewed the Pulte discharge application and doesn’t seem to have a problem with it as far as water quality impacts. Janet Bowman from Confederate Ridge II is in contact with Jean. On that basis, although the Army Corps of Engineers are soliciting citizen comments, the committee plans on taking no action.

    2. The county is conducting a public hearing on the Chesapeake Bay act changes on 5 December. Jim Hart brought to the committee his concerns:
      • Notice to civic associations: The draft says that the applicants on the exceptions requiring these new public hearings will give notice to the civic association as determined by DPWES, using the address in the tax records. Notice to the civic association is good but using the DTA website information is not. Unlike for privately owned property, the DTA information for HOA open space is rarely updated and often wrong. HOA property is never the subject of transactions, so no deeds cross anyone's desk. The original information put in when the subdivision is platted usually has the HOA care of some developer. But it is never used for anything and no tax bills ever go out. There is no requirement that it be updated and using that address is often like sending things to the dead letter office. For civic associations that own no land, they won’t be listed in the DTA database anyway. The DTA information is reasonably current as to ownership information but very bad as to mailing addresses for owners of properties that don’t get tax bills.

        Under the ordinance, each HOA that owns common area land must be a nonstock corporation. Under the state code, each corporation must file an annual report with the state corporation commission in Richmond, listing the officers and directors and a registered agent. That information is used for all sorts of official notices, lawsuits, subpoenas, etc. and is kept on a free website, and is also available by telephone. That information may not be 100% perfect but is much better than what is in DTA.

        A suggestion would be that if the civic association were a corporation, that the applicant notify an officer or the registered agent as listed in the records of the SCC. If it is not listed with the SCC then the civic association's address as determined by DPWES, which might be what the supervisor had [again that is hit and miss, there is no requirement that anything ever be updated]. If there were a district council or an umbrella group they would be a good resource but maybe that doesn’t belong in the ordinance.

      • Staff seems to have too much control over the composition of the new board. The "Exception Review Committee" which will hear the public hearings must be composed of five county employees appointed by the Director of DPWES. The Director is required to make a recommendation of approval, denial, or approval with conditions on each of the applications requiring a public hearing to the new Board. But who really expects that the five appointees will ever dare to go against the Director's recommendation if he is their boss. It raises the question when are they subordinates/employees and when are they decision makers? There doesn’t seem to be any independence or balance in that. The composition of the committee needs to be revisited. Many other boards and commissions are more diverse, with district representatives, industry, citizens, etc. Staff may have expertise and a legitimate point of view but having five staff members exclusively seems very rigid. Also why is the Director of DPWES doing the appointing rather than the BOS?

        Another issue with creating a brand new board for this category of public hearings is the budgetary implications. Will they be paid - like the BOS, BZA, PC, etc - or is this part of their job, or what? Do we need additional staff positions for a clerk, secretary, office supplies, packets, someone to do the advertising, staff coordinators, etc? What does all that cost? The filing fee for the public hearing cases is only $100 extra and it is doubtful that is enough even to cover the newspaper advertising. The county should be breaking even at least.

      • 3. Another issue would be the definition of "lot" is simply repeated. It doesn’t work as it is, it is too narrow, and it doesn’t seem to include all the land in the county that isn’t in right of way. The circuit court ruled this year in one case that something wasn’t a "lot" under the ordinance, which is a major problem. The definition needs to be broadened so that all the land is regulated; everything needs to be covered.

      The committee voted unanimously to endorse Jim’s concerns and have him speak for the committee at the public hearing. The public hearing scheduled for 5 December was canceled due to snow and will be rescheduled

  5. Other scheduled meetings:

    1. A public hearing on the location of the Tri-County Connector ( http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/resources/TCPmap.pdf ) was planned for 5 December from 5-8 PM, with a presentation at 6 PM, at Westfield High School. Additional hearings ( http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/publicinvolvement.asp#project )will be held in Prince William and Loudoun counties. The 6 December Westfield High School presentation was canceled due to snow and has been rescheduled for Friday, 12 December.

    2. Environmental Quality Advisory Council To Hold Annual Public Hearing to solicit comments on the state of the environment in Fairfax County, Wednesday, 11 December 2002, 7:30 P.M., Conference Rooms 2 and 3, Fairfax County Government Center, Lobby Level, 12000 Government Center Parkway, Fairfax, Virginia

      The Fairfax County Environmental Quality Advisory Council (EQAC) is an advisory group that has been appointed by the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors to advise the Board on environmental matters. The Council is comprised of one citizen representative from each Magisterial District, four at-large members, and one student representative. Each year, EQAC holds a public hearing to obtain citizen input on issues of environmental concern. The public is encouraged to attend and share views on the state of the environment and to identify any environmental issues applicable to Fairfax County. Environmental issues considered by EQAC include water quality, air quality, noise, hazardous materials, solid waste, stream valley protection, wildlife management, light pollution, visual pollution, and the use and preservation of ecological resources. The Council would welcome your written and/or verbal testimony.

      The public is encouraged to attend and share views on the state of the environment and to identify any environmental issues applicable to Fairfax County. Environmental issues considered by EQAC include water quality, air quality, noise, hazardous materials, solid waste, stream valley protection, wildlife management, light pollution, visual pollution and the use and preservation of ecological resources.

      To be placed on the speakers list or for additional information, call the Fairfax County Department of Planning and Zoning at 324-1210 or send an e-mail message to EQAC@fairfaxcounty.gov

      In case of inclement weather, call 324-1210 the day of the public hearing

    3. A public hearing on the location of the Route 29 Battlefield Bypass is planned for 12 December from 5-8 PM, with a presentation at 6 PM, at the Holiday Inn at the I66/Route 234 interchange. For more information follow this link: http://www.battlefieldbypass.com
  6. Planned for 6 January 2003 Meeting:

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey M. Parnes
Chair, Sully District Council
Land Use and Transportation Committee

Sully District Council Home Page

Sully District Council Minutes

Land Use & Transportation Committee Minutes

Data Area Transportation Association information

2004 ©SDC; last modified Tuesday, 26 October 2004
http://www.SullyDistrict.org      webmaster@sullydistrict.org

modified by Jeffrey M. Parnes