"No to Railroad Cottages" signs along W&OD in Falls Church

[DanB]

I saw the “No to Railroad Cottage” signs this morning and wondered what the issue was. I found this article on the subject:
https://fcnp.com/2017/03/02/future-cottage-communities-little-city/

The development is planned on this property: http://bit.ly/2p0udQT

Discussion may now commence.

Topic

[EasyRider]

@TwoWheelsDC 159319 wrote:

Median list price in that corner of FC is $788,000. Just across Broad to the east, it’s over $1 million. So $600k is actually pretty “affordable” for that area of Falls Church. I’m also guessing that the seniors that are the target audience will be relatively wealthy and looking to “downsize” from larger homes further out.

I guess everyone missed the part where I wrote, “At $600K a pop, it doesn’t really seem “affordable” to me, but I guess everything is relative.”.

[accordioneur]

@Drewdane 159306 wrote:

Nobody’s opposed to the development per se, just the scope.

A classic NIMBY quote! “I’m not opposed to development in the abstract; I just oppose every specific development because they’re all wrong.”

I think a development like this is a great idea, since for the most part sensible “downsizing” housing doesn’t exist in this area. Maybe I’m biased because I just became an empty-nester and am creeping up on meeting the age restriction (sigh).

I haven’t read through the proposal and so don’t have an opinion on this development vis a vis the W&OD, but I don’t think this community would be any worse for the trail than the many other adjacent private parcels.

[Drewdane]

@accordioneur 159322 wrote:

A classic NIMBY quote! “I’m not opposed to development in the abstract; I just oppose every specific development because they’re all wrong.”

I think a development like this is a great idea, since for the most part sensible “downsizing” housing doesn’t exist in this area. Maybe I’m biased because I just became an empty-nester and am creeping up on meeting the age restriction (sigh).

I haven’t read through the proposal and so don’t have an opinion on this development vis a vis the W&OD, but I don’t think this community would be any worse for the trail than the many other adjacent private parcels.

I agree, but those of us who have to live next to the final result would simply like to see the housing/parking ratio rebalanced.

[mstone]

The whole damn world needs to revolve around car storage

[EasyRider]

The plan renderings are nice. I wonder if there is the political will to allow this kind of development for non-Boomers. Those under 55 can in theory just buy the older, larger homes their elders are leaving. But not for $600,000 …

[lordofthemark]

@Drewdane 159325 wrote:

I agree, but those of us who have to live next to the final result would simply like to see the housing/parking ratio rebalanced.

What is the proper parking minimum for smallish houses located a long but doable walk to metro, a short walk to local bus service (and a likely future BRT line) and a premier walking biking trail, smallish houses whose residents will not have to take kids to pre school, many of whom will not be commuting at all, etc, if 1.3 spaces per unit is too stingy?

How many offstreet spaces do all the existing houses in the neighborhood have?

Is there permit parking in the neighborhood?

[Vicegrip]

@TwoWheelsDC 159313 wrote:

Very similar to the fight over “Sunrise” in McLean…apparently building assisted-living facilities in low density suburbs with relatively aged populations is controversial…

http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2017/03/31/thumbs-down-for-sunrises-mclean-project-from.html

Perhaps but I don’t think they are quite the same. This is not assisted living it is a cluster of SFH next to trail and public transportation. End use of the land is essentially the same, houses. More than before but other than cars on nearby roads no other homeowner interruptions. the nearby streets are not congested or have pinch points or other problems that might cause issue with 20 or so more car trips a day over them. Right now the other existing homeowners are looking at a cement plant and the backs of some business and car lots.
The original Sunrise proposal was well taller than other structures in the area and had a large HVAC unit near the prop line backing an existing row of single family houses. They would have been looking at the working, business side of a big building, delivery trucks, dumpsters employee parking lot and the HVAC unit of that format runs all the time 24/7. New proposal pulls it all away from the existing houses and lowers it below the sight lines. Ether proposal increases traffic into an already busy intersection that also sees surge traffic from the nearby school. People and cars come and go all day long from this format of business.

Building higher concentrations of higher value near pub transport and being 55+ means more tax without more kids in the $chool system too.

[dkel]

I live in Falls Church City, and ride my bike down Railroad Avenue almost every day on my commute (I started riding that little street to access the trail instead of cutting across on the gravel path during BAFS a couple of years ago because it gives me an extra .2 mi on my commute to go down there and come back up the trail, and I never got out of the habit of doing it). Anyway, I can’t think of a legitimate reason why this is a bad thing, aside from it being a change from the people who looked like they were squatting on that tract for years (I don’t think they were squatters, but they lived in an RV, and had a yard full of debris). The impact on the surrounding community will be negligible.

[cvcalhoun]

@Vicegrip 159336 wrote:

This is not assisted living

I suppose that would depend on your definition of assisted living. It allows people who can no longer drive to remain independent. It has a communal kitchen, so it allows those who can no longer cook (or aren’t safe around open flames) to eat. It has safe walking areas, so elderly people can get exercise without braving traffic. Those things could enable elderly people to remain independent much longer than they could otherwise manage.

[Vicegrip]

@cvcalhoun 159341 wrote:

I suppose that would depend on your definition of assisted living. It allows people who can no longer drive to remain independent. It has a communal kitchen, so it allows those who can no longer cook (or aren’t safe around open flames) to eat. It has safe walking areas, so elderly people can get exercise without braving traffic. Those things could enable elderly people to remain independent much longer than they could otherwise manage.

Good points. I wonder how they plan on maintaining and for want of a better word regulating the communal parts? Is the kitchen staffed or simply open for use?

[accordioneur]

@cvcalhoun 159341 wrote:

It has a communal kitchen, so it allows those who can no longer cook (or aren’t safe around open flames) to eat.

I think you’re misunderstanding the common house. It sounds like it’s a “clubhouse” such as is found in many new developments. It’s not a place where all the residents go for meals prepared by a kitchen staff. It sounds like the developer is thinking in terms of a senior cohousing community without calling it by that name.

And did you check out the following – can we hate a place which offers this?

“Bike cage provided
A secure bike cage will be provided so owners have a convenient and safe place to store their bikes, there by (sic) further encouraging such use.

Shared bicycles provided
3-4 bicycles will be provided when units are occupied to encourage their use as an alternative to automobiles.”

[Steve O]

@Vicegrip 159336 wrote:

This is not assisted living….

Thank you, he said (as someone who would actually qualify).

[DanB]

@accordioneur 159373 wrote:

I think you’re misunderstanding the common house. It sounds like it’s a “clubhouse” such as is found in many new developments. It’s not a place where all the residents go for meals prepared by a kitchen staff. It sounds like the developer is thinking in terms of a senior cohousing community without calling it by that name.[/FONT]

I agree. Each house has its own kitchen. Like many newer townhouse developments, there’s a building where larger groups can get together and eat since that’s not feasible in the small-ish homes.

[Vicegrip]

Interesting thread. I admit am open to new formats that don’t have negative or unusual impacts on those already in the area. One thing that came to me. Around the corner from my house was a radio station and 4 antennas on a good sized parcel of prop. It sold and they built 28 houses on the prop. To the best of my knowledge there was little hand wringing when the land was developed into many standard oversize houses that is being built now.
The access to the development is via a single side street off of Orland off of Powhatan. Those streets are similar to Railroad ave but will now see a traffic increase from the 28 additional houses and all that goes with them. No direct access to trails or rails. I think at times we adjust our sensitivities to what we are used to.

[huskerdont]

@Vicegrip 159389 wrote:

Interesting thread. I admit am open to new formats that don’t have negative or unusual impacts on those already in the area. One thing that came to me. Around the corner from my house was a radio station and 4 antennas on a good sized parcel of prop. It sold and they built 28 houses on the prop. To the best of my knowledge there was little hand wringing when the land was developed into many standard oversize houses that is being built now.
The access to the development is via a single side street off of Orland off of Powhatan. Those streets are similar to Railroad ave but will now see a traffic increase from the 28 additional houses and all that goes with them. No direct access to trails or rails. I think at times we adjust our sensitivities to what we are used to.

Used to take the dog to that field. Miss it. We are losing a lot of open, infill space around here, whatever one’s opinion on that.

[Author]

Replies