The All Over Zoning Code of Vienna

I have not seen other builders get away with this. It's not clear why Bukont gets these special deals and to hell with the other builders. If everything is above board, I for one would like to hear from the Town why this building appears to exceed the height limit? I am not against anyone making a honest living building homes, but when someone gets special treatment, it needs to be investigated.

I am paid to do as Maud Robinson dictates. If she says to count a 4-story building like it is a 3-story building, I do it. What are you so mad about Dr. Stich?

With regards to the Locust Street Town home Project - it is legal and acceptable building practice both in Fairfax County, the Town of Vienna and any other municipality that I am aware of to raise the grade in order to meet height requirements. That would not be "special treatment". If you understand how building height is calculated, raising the grade is a normal thing that all builders sometimes do to achieve compliance.

The Locust Street site was always zoned "RM-2", multi- family, even tough there WAS one single-family house on it before the town home construction. It was not re-zoned to accommodate the townhouses; rather it is now being brought into compliance.

The Tapawingo and Glyndon Street site that you speak of is zoned currently zoned C-1, commercial. The price you quote I would think would be appropriate for such a property with that zoning. I seriously doubt it will be re-zoned to multi-family, as I would think a far more lucrative decision would be to keep it commercial and build something such as an upscale neighborhood restaurant here in SE...

I am also pretty sure that Greg Hembree is NOT the author of the above post.

Deborah B

This was built on flat land. There is no need to raise the grade except to get an extra floor (i.e. more height to exceed limit). There are lots of 'legal' things in this world, but this type of nonsense reeks of special treatment. We have already seen the close "put some $$$ in your pocket relationship' Council members like Laurie Cole have had (continue?) with this builder and now this? Where are the examples across Vienna with this type of flat land grade raise? On top of height breaches, how do you explain the allowance of a defacto pipe stem? That's legal too?

And the Tapawingo site wants a restaurant? That's what those residents want there? You basically want a flashing red light luring bunches of people into the middle of a residential neighborhood TO EAT? Huh? What then, drunk driving check points to catch the intoxicated restaurant goers? NO commercial business has ever made it there. What's changed? Multi-family housing proposal is coming...

I'm not here to argue any points - ( I have learned better than that...) I'm just here to explain the facts, so that the information on this site is clear and unbiased -

ANY TIME at ALL that a new sturcture of any sort is built, the "grade" must be "remanufactured" by the builder for that particular structure - So, basically, ANY grade is "artificial" in a sense - There are many,many (if not most) examples of structures whose "end grade" is significantly different from the original...(And this is not always a bad thing- Developers have to take into consideration erosion, neighborhood impact, Chesapeake Bay impact, impervious cover...We have a LOT of rules....)

I walk past the new townhouses every day on my morning walk - AND I have studied your pictures - They certainly do not appear to be to me as "4 -story Townhouses"....Now, they MAY, in fact have living area on a fourth level, but nonetheless, if you look at your own photographs, and subtract what is Obviously the front grade point (where the steps come up on the foundation off of the ground), they DO appear to me (and I have some experience) to meet code....

Yes, it does look like the GRADE will come up about three feet on the front. But that is not unexpected or alarming.

I do not know the plans for the Tapawingo site. I am simply stating that since it is Master Planned C-1, the more lucrative choice would be to keep it that way, and not re-zone it. The parcel is not appropriately shaped for corner-zoned townhomes. That is simply not within the cards.

A restaurant? Personally, I think I would be there tonight! But that site could be ANYTHING in the C-1 (Commercial) designation. Right now, it is an electronics distribution facility. I suppose it could stay exactly that, and that would be just fine.

DB

Likely when the townhomes next door were built in the 1960s, they did not take creative advantage of the Code, as written. A "fake hill" is considered "grade: by FfxCo (and TOV) so long as it meets other grading and erosion requuirements. I reiterate - This is NOT a BAD THING - We have just come back from an Urban Studies Program, credited for MIRM, and presented by the NAHB - One of the PRIMARY OBJECTIVES taught there was the "uplifting" of Residential Structures above grade - Think of it like putting the houses on an earthen "pedistal"...Homes close to the street, separtated by sidewalk, lifted up - The overall neighborhood "effect" is quite pleasing - I have to think that SB's finished product will be an asset for TOV.

Now, (if I am not already...) let me play the Devil's Advocate for the Tapawingo/Glyndon parcel.

I really do think it is likely to remain zoned as is, C-1.

Suppose, though, it IS re-zoned.

As stated, the SHAPE of the parcel is not conducive to Townhomes. It is a corner site (with corner restirctions, and if residentially rezoned, will fall into the RS -12.5 catagory...)

Let's suppose is DOES get re-zoned for multi family. Imagine we have a 3-story condominium building going in. 14,000 sq.ft. lot? Most you could get is 2 untits per floor - So there would be six (3x2) condominiums being built on that corner.

Why the big bruhaha? What's the fuss? Vienna NEEDS some affordable style housing for the elderly, empty nesters, and starter couples! Why put a limit on our housing and say "Only single family! Only 1m+ for new houses!"

So what if we DO have some townhouses or condos there? It only means more diversified product, and people of differering incomes will have more choices....What's the big deal? I live in SE, and we are not such elitists here that we would object to that...

And you? Deborah

...creative advantage of the Code

Steve Bukont found a loophole to make some money because Vienna's Code is outdated garbage. And that you find good planning? Were Bukont’s Board decisions against other residents, resulting in multiple lawsuits, more "creative" use of the Code? Since the Code says nothing, he makes up whatever to fill in the gap? This kind of nonsense can only exist in the land of machine politics.

Points and questions to consider:

1. Where are these other 'earthen pedestals' you speak of? Where else in Vienna? Or was this the first creative use of the Code?

2. No lot in Vienna sells for under $500,000. There is no distinction within Vienna regarding location. All land is valuable. Class warfare is a worthless tactic on this site.

3. The limit to single-family housing is Maud Robinson's doing. Blame her.

4. This creative use of code you speak of only helps some people. This woman was hurt by your former Board's creativity. But if you grease the right skids...

I don't think that is a loophole. It is the law as it currently stands....It offends me that you refer to our Town Code as "outdated garbage". I really think we are trying as best we can...Not everyone is PERFECT, but most are trying as hard as they know how...At least they CARE....

1. I am not personally aware of any "earthen pedistals" within TOV - I Do know that it is a concept that is being used with huge success in other "southern in-fill towns". I would suggest you look at www.simonini.com, and then look for the area "Heydon Hall". You will see the concept there -We do not have to keep all land "flat" (nor is that aesthetically desirable) in order to "meet code"

2. I do not understand what you mean by "class warfare" I must not be so sophisticated or perhaps educated to understand you. Can you explain?

3. How is MR limiting our Single family housing inventory? I do not understand. IF, for example, SB WERE to get his corner on Glyndon and Tap re-zoned to multi-familty RM -2, then what could she do to stop him from building there?

I am still really dense about how you have come to these conclusions...

I am,

Pollyanna

1. The first of its kind 'earthen pedestal' is described as the 'law' and not a loophole, but at the same time Maud Robinson sinks the entire Maple Avenue Vision Committee due to the possibility of raising height limits? Does anyone recall public hearings about design and planning in Vienna revolving around 'phony grades' to get taller buildings? The whole concept might be fine, if it was widely applied and consistently to all.

2. You did not address the 'creative' use of the Code by the Commercial Architectural Review Board or the Windover Heights Board of Review to harm Town residents and business owners. Was that just an example of their CARING for us? You can't show one example of anyone 'trying as best we can' in these situations. You are right, they do CARE about maintaining power and making money - for themselves. They love using an outdated (and very non-specific) law to creatively dose out favors to friends and quash foes. This nonsense that these people are mommy/daddy characters looking out for our best interests is a load of you know what. The evidence clearly shows, for example, Robinson is in this for power and Cole for money.

3. When should we expect the ARB to move beyond zero objective standards? If these people CARE so much, they must be burning the midnight oil to fix the law, right?

4. "I live in SE, and we are not such elitists here that we would object to that..." is an example of class warfare.

5. You can check the record; Maud is on it for 50 years railing against (and voting) against anything beyond single-family housing. Most examples you see in Vienna were either so long ago or won in Court battles. There is your true class warrior.

6. For Bukont to get that Tapawingo property rezoned, he will need Council votes. And you ask how it can be stopped?

And yes we are REALLY curious how you came to your conclusions...

You are going around in a circle and have started to contradict your own self.

This post began by your stating that SB paid X dollars for a certain site and your comment is

"Think he paid a million bucks without assurance from Maud and Jane that he could get higher density (ie multiple residences)?

In your most recent post you state

"You can check the record; Maud is on it for 50 years railing against anything beyond single family housing."

So, which is it? Did she assure SB that he could get multi family or does she continue to rail against it? She can't do both.

I think the safer bet is the second choice. It is highly unlikely that she assured SB that the corner of Tapawingo and Glyndon would be re-zoned from Commercial to Multi-family Residential.

My be is that it will stay Commercial.

Oh, and btw, your apparent view of a neighborhood restaurant and mine are entirely different - What makes you think that would involve a "flashing red light luring bunches of people" and "drunk driving check points and "intoxicated restaurant goers"?

Speaking of cranky...

I never suggested that we open a "HOOTERS"!

You might not like the facts and no spin reporting on this site, but none of it is going in circles. Going in circles is the Town government's modus operandi. No one said Robinson was consistent. She doles out favors too; even favors that contradict her well stated positions. The record is clear on all of this. Just because you say or write something that makes a good headline doesn't mean there is substance to it.

Here's a map of Vienna. Notice that the old 7-Eleven is the only commercial property stuck in the middle of a residential area. No other Vienna quadrant has a commercial property buried in the middle of it. The old 7-Eleven is not only buried in single-family residential zoning... it is in an area that is cutoff from potential customer traffic by the W&OD trail. It is an old commercial site that is no longer in a viable commercial location... single-family residential has developed all around it.

The Town of Vienna should rezone this property to single-family residential respective of its location. No one living here wants a 4-story multi-residential or commercial complex built on this site... you'll see. Steve Bukont will build a block of condos there, if the Town lets him. Or, he will build office space, perhaps for his many companys he currently operates out of private homes in our neighborhood. If the Town lets him abuse this single-family residential area further, what's next?... that huge lot at the north end of Tapawingo... or that huge tear-down corner lot at Park and Tapawingo... or pick any 3 or 4 tear-down lots in a row found all over SE Vienna... will the Town let Steve Bukont make money cramming in higher density condos next to your home? It's time for Bukont to grow up and move away from home... our homes.

High-End resturant? That's as crazy as anyone who thinks Bukont builds quality houses. Bukont houses are poor construction, quickly built with little attention to quality, guaranteed to rot, peel, sink, sag, and pop apart before he returns his rental equipment. He doesn't install a decent sidewalk to your front door because 'it will settle' (read cheap!), but that doesn't stop him from pouring all of those porch foundations in overdig areas that are still settling long after the concrete sets. The warming, high-rainfall Virginia climate will do its number on those Bukont cupcakes!

Here's a question... who bought the old 7-Eleven lot, held it for 11 months, and then sold it to Bukont for a cool $240k profit? Nice flip!... Laurie?

Now you ARE making me think...The "odd" commercial site IS an anomally....STILL - I would vote for a nice, quiet, studied little neighobrhood restaurant or wine bar - Out door seating? A must! - I would BET we'll see you there...

No "flashing red lights" - No "check points", as I visualize myself WALKING, not driving there....HHHHhhhmmmm.

On to another issue. Why is it bad for anyone to sell a property to anyone else at a PROFIT? Welcome to America! That is what we do! Are you people such Socialists that you are blind to the American Way? I can't get your point....

In Addition - We are NOT huge SB fans. In all honesty, we barely know him. Met him a couple of times down at Bazin's, don't even know if we would recognize him on the street tomorrow...

But we DID walk thru his house on Park (near Cedar). And we must say that the construction was studied and precise....It was an extraordinately well-built house- Not only "met code", but went far beyand that in terms of construction.

So, Neighbor - You may not like the exterior, and perhaps the "frou-frou" is beyond you, but please post ONE, even ONE thing that is being built beneath the code- Steve Bukont is our COMPETITOR - Our RIVAL if you will - and yet there is not ONE, NOT ONE instance that we can see where he has been any less than admirable and fair with his construction.

Answear?

>On to another issue. Why is it bad for anyone to sell a property to anyone else at a PROFIT?

Ask Duke Cunningham.

>But we DID walk thru his house on Park (near Cedar). And we must say that the construction was studied and precise...

It gets rebuilt regularly.

>but please post ONE, even ONE thing that is being built beneath the code- Answear?

Code hardly defines quality... sheds are built to code. Look for sinking porches, parting porchwork, troublesome roof lines, bouncy floors, front-side only finish trim, no walks, cramped halls and doorways, one-pass finished floors, pour-seams in basement walls now covered by drywall, soft pine too near soil grade, landfill all around, etc...

>Steve Bukont is our COMPETITOR - Our RIVAL if you will - and yet there is not ONE, NOT ONE instance that we can see where he has been any less than admirable and fair with his construction.

Oh really? You are not helping yourself here then... or are you?

I haven't seen those issues you describe with Steve's houses. Honestly. I do know some people who have been living in Bukont Homes for 4-5-6 years, and they seem very happy with them.

I think sometimes his houses can be pretty ornate, and then people don't keep up the proper maintenance and as a result exterior trim (like porch work) can deteriorate pretty rapidly. But that isn't the builder's fault.

I also think that the commercial buildings on Church Street are pretty well built, so far as I can tell. The newest one looks very, very complicated to me! I don't think we could even begin to build something like that - We'd be working on it forever, and probably never would get it right!

Hope everyone has a good Friday! See you later!

Who's tummy can I tickle over this issue? Cole?

Has anybody looked at the exposed painted CINDER BLOCK WALL on the building that Nelsen's occupies on Church Street? That exposed CINDER BLOCK WALL would not have been approved for any other builder in this town other than Bukont. In fact it is not even permitted in the Church Street Vision Guidelines. It is prohibited. Check out that wall Deborah and explain its existence to me.