On the Ground at Berry and East Street

210 East Street SE is assessed at $792K, which is a bit high for a teardown.

http://www.zillow.com/HomeDetails.htm?zprop=51769734

And if someone were to tear it down and build a new, so what? Better than a bunch of condos.

1. Vienna condos/apartments/town houses already exist. You are aware of that fact? Do you know how they got there?

2. You are right, Adams house, since it is surrounded by single family hones, and doesn't touch commercial, will not be either condos or an office building. Do you understand the distinction here? I have faith you can grasp it.

I believe the original question was "Dennis Adams house? It will be torn down the day he moves. Do these people not realize that their houses are tear downs?"

And I believe I have provided the answer.

Adams' house is a tear down.

Now will you try and answer the two questions posed?

Certainly... let's review:

1) Yes, there are condos already in Vienna... where the zoning allows it.

2) Adams' house's zoning doesn't allow it.

3) But #1 and #2 don't mean we should change the zoning in other parts of Vienna (example: proposed Berry project), to encourage building more condos... especially when Adams and his neighbors don't want them.

4) Whether or not HV believes the other houses on Berry should be torn down is irrelevant to #3... and probably not true per the evidence I cited.

Ok. I see. Funny guy/girk or moron or Maud or all? The comment is not about Adams house as a tear down for condos, but as a tear down for a large, new single family home. Do you understand that higher density rezonings will only take place on residential property that abuts commercial property? Please, please try and follow.

I thought the idea of mixed use development along 123 was to replace tired old commercial structures with modern mixed use complexes that promote walkable lifestyles. Now you're saying the idea is to tear down houses at the edge of the residential areas and max out density on those lots, with parking garages to store all the cars they're going to be adding to our streets. Why on earth is that desirable?

Why don't you try and follow, HV? Whether or not it abuts a commerically zoned property, the people of this town don't want to change the zoning to allow the building of condos! That's why you had a meetigng filled with people against the proposal.

Now, why is it we should change our minds?

I understand your attitudes: forget precdent, forget law, stick it to people you don't like or approve of. As long as the mob wants something, laws be damned, it's ok. At least we understand your position now. The BS coming from your mouths is the same nonsense that comes from the mob who supports an illegal historic district. So come on, one more time tell us how the mob is right cause the mob wants something.

My head is hurting. Precedent has been set & from my very limited knowledge of the law, that does mean something.

Some properties to look into to give you some history: 115 Beulah NE, 120 Beulah NE, 243 Church NW, 112 Glyndon NE.

Do you remember those properties? In my mind, I can picture those single family houses perfectly as they once stood. They are now something else because there is something call "Transitional" zoning.

My head is hurting. Precedent has been set & from my very limited knowledge of the law, that does mean something.

Better yet? Maud and her husband, the former Mayor, wrote the transitional law we are discussing and approved all of the prior applications that set precedent.

vienna mommy, none of the properties you list are ultra dense residential condo developments. You and the rest of the HV.com crew keep saying there are precedents, but I don't see anyplace that the town approved replacing a couple of houses with a super dense condo complex complete with parking garage. Bukont probably could succeed at getting zoning approved to do something like the properties you cite as precedents, but that's not what he tried to do.

Perhaps in your mind, you can picture those single family houses.... but when you open your eyes, do you see condos at those locations? A quick internet check finds offices or shops at all of those addresses.

So I'm not seeing the precedent of approval of a zoning change to build condos.

Bukont probably could succeed at getting zoning approved to do something like the properties you cite as precedents, but that's not what he tried to do.

Exactly! An office building is coming. They proposed condos as they viewed it as a lesser use than an office building (which is up for debate). They will get an office building though. So what will be the argument against an office building?

>>So what will be the argument against an office building?

[yawn] Don't need it, don't want it. Our residential neighborhoods are just fine as they are. If you ask me, T-Zoning is an out-dated concept. Who wants more rinky-dink back-of-lot offices when you can find plenty of existing unleased office space in town. T-Zoning is pointless these days... even Bukont doesn't use an office building... he conducts his multi-million dollar client business out of his home.

Someone tell me what the lot coverage is at 243 Church or 120 Beulah. It's well over 50-60%.

If precedent is right, it sure seems like he can build an office building & parking lot with almost 80% lot coverage (if not more).

But, how would condos be worse than the atrocity that sits at 243 Church. It's 3 stories and might as well be a condo complex.

Maud and Charlie conceived and created the Transitional Zone ordinance to establish a 200-foot buffer area between commercial and residential zones. The Transitional zone is designed to provide a smooth transition between Commercial and Residential Zones. This Zone was designed specifically for pieces of property like Berry Street. Any land zoned Transitional must be surrounded by a six high masonry wall. All Transitional zoned land has been granted 75 to 80% lot coverage. This modification is necessary because Maud and Charlie forgot that parking must be available for the building footprint. If you review the zoning ordinance you will see that if a piece of land is zoned Transitional, the commercial intrusion into the residential zone is very effectively blocked. I do not understand why Maud will not explain to the Berry Street residents that she created this zone specifically for this type of property. Maud has a responsibility to allay the residents’ fears instead of inflaming them. The Transitional zone is a well written and has done its job. It is time for Maud and the TC to stop playing politics and explain to the citizens that the Transitional Zone Ordinance was designed to PRESERVE the single-family residential charter of the Town and is an effective land use control. The Transitional zone is a well-written ordinance and has done its job well throughout the Town.

Maud and Charlie conceived and created the Transitional Zone ordinance to establish a 200-foot buffer area between commercial and residential zones. The Transitional zone is designed to provide a smooth transition between Commercial and Residential Zones. This Zone was designed specifically for pieces of property like Berry Street. Any land zoned Transitional must be surrounded by a six high masonry wall. All Transitional zoned land has been granted 75 to 80% lot coverage. This modification is necessary because Maud and Charlie forgot that parking must be available for the building footprint. If you review the zoning ordinance you will see that if a piece of land is zoned Transitional, the commercial intrusion into the residential zone is very effectively blocked. I do not understand why Maud will not explain to the Berry Street residents that she created this zone specifically for this type of property. Maud has a responsibility to allay the residents’ fears instead of inflaming them. The Transitional zone is a well written and has done its job. It is time for Maud and the TC to stop playing politics and explain to the citizens that the Transitional Zone Ordinance was designed to PRESERVE the single-family residential charter of the Town and is an effective land use control. The Transitional zone is a well-written ordinance and has done its job well throughout the Town.

A few facts... One, Bukont's RM-2 re-zoning proposal for Berry Street is not T-Zoning and it was for 50% lot coverage, which is twice the 25% lot coverage allowed by RM-2 zoning. Just what was he thinking, anyway! Two, T-Zoning may enjoy 60-70% lot coverage, but this precedent is for parking space, not for two 3-story condo buildings. T-Zoning is a specific zone for very specific transitional use for OFFICES that must conform highly with the surrounding residential zoning land use requirements and construction forms. So T-Zoning may have 60-70% lot coverage due to parking spaces, but it's still only going to have low-profile buildings that conform to the surrounding residential zoning land use requirements and construction forms. So, Bukont can go build some dinky offices like the silly flawed T-Zoning has allowed elsewhere in town... witness those ugly offices crammed in behind the Dairy Queen strip mall... but he has to make them look like the surrounding tear-downs, because that's how flawed the T-Zoning code is!

T-Zoning is a specific zone for very specific transitional use for OFFICES that must conform highly with the surrounding residential zoning land use requirements and construction forms.

Want me to take a picture of 243 Church Street NW just so you can see how Maud has used her ordinance to create buildings that "conform highly" with the surrounding zoning.

Go away. I'm done.

More On the ground at Berry Street insight from the Town Planning Commission Minutes:

Mr. Attanasi said that the below grade parking would require quite a bit of excavation and asked if borings had been taken. Patrick Kessler, GJB Engineering, stated that at this time a soil mapping has been done for the property but no borings have been performed so far.

Mr. Attanasi said there are several things that are troubling to him about this application; in terms of the detail and conceptual plan they have been repeatedly been told by the applicant’s attorney that the applicant has great design talents yet no conceptual plan has been submitted. Mr. Attanasi said the second thing is that if one accepts the density of 22 units per acre, that is out of line with the rest of the RM-2 density. In looking at the Comprehensive Plan in the multi-family category, and dividing it by the acreage you come out to abut 15 units per acre, which is almost a 50% increase in density to the proposed 22 units. Mr. Attanasi said nothing has been proffered in terms of the plan because there is very little detail and was disappointed to find no engineering had been done. Mr. Attanasi said the applicant’s attorney repeatedly talks about the Church Street professional buildings...

Good point... Bukont didn't do borings on his Church Street project either. When he excavated the underground parking garage, he hit ground water and was forced to raise the building up and pile a bunch of brick stairs in front of it on the pedestrian right-of-way, violating both building height and setback limits.

Mr. Miller wanted to note for the record that at the last meeting Mr. Odenkirk at 8642 McHenry Street, Vienna , gave testimony and when asked by Mr. Miller if he was a resident of the Town Mr. Odenkirk replied yes when in fact he is not a resident of the Town but resides outside of the Town limits.

Isn't that special! Doug brings his neighbor to stand up as the only citizen witness in defense of Bukont's Berry Street rezoning request... and the guy lies. I wonder who else lied on behalf of Bukont's rezoning request?

>>Want me to take a picture of 243 Church Street NW just so you can see how Maud has used her ordinance to create buildings that "conform highly" with the surrounding zoning.

Those RS-16 lots stuck behind the post office at the bottom of the hill and across the street from the backside of Maple Avenue businesses are not your typical single-family residential neighborhood... more like an extention of the Church Street commercial strip. Was Maud even in Town government in 1985?

Was Maud even in Town government in 1985?

Now come on. Of course she was. Her and her husband were involved in the Vienna government for over 50 years. he was on council from the late sixties and Mayor since 76 to his death. To try and say Maud was just some innocent not involved is a load of you know what...and you know it.

The revisionist history going on now is completely mind-boggling.

Was I the ONLY one at the NARFE debate with Maud talking about running the town in the 60s and creating the historic district.

Maud opening brags about making the town what it is and now the party line is that Maud had nothing to do with anything.

And, BTW, she is 85 years old.

>>... and now the party line is that Maud had nothing to do with anything.

Relax, I just asked the question. I have no party affiliation here. All of this huffing and puffing that goes on around here fools no one but fools. Surely you want to appeal to a wider audience, yes?

>>Want me to take a picture of 243 Church Street NW just so you can see how Maud has used her ordinance to create buildings that "conform highly" with the surrounding zoning.

I think if your house were behind that you may have felt differently. Plus I am not 100% sure, but I think that was in th "HD". The point not to loose sight of is the zoning period. I think Town Green to start comparing sites misses the big picture, and once again pits one part of Town against the other.

Wider audience? Perhaps. Will I change what I know/think to appeal to the masses? Nope. Am I willing to wait for everyone to slowly realize who is leading the town? Yes. Will it happen any sooner if I change my way of talking? Nope.

When the day is over, people will see the politicians for who they are. Some think we are crazy for posting here, but slowly people learn the truth (if they want to).

Interesting item posted on the front page of Susan Stich's campaign web site:

Dear Susan,
We very much appreciate your listening to the concerns of the Murmuring Pines neighborhood, and your support for sound and fair zoning decisions which do not punish residents of established single family neighborhoods.

Best of luck. We will spread the word.

- J, Murmuring Pines

So condos are bad when you're running for office, and good after you lose?

So HV - when are you going to disclosed that you are just po'd cus you speculated on that Lawyers Road property and guess what, the post office isn't being expanded, and guess what, if this rezoning request was denied, what is going to happen to your property. That's why they call it "speculation." Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But at least you have been shamed into cleaning up that dump.

So you gonna post this???

So HV - when are you going to disclosed that you are just po'd cus you speculated on that Lawyers Road property and guess what, the post office isn't being expanded, and guess what, if this rezoning request was denied, what is going to happen to your property. That's why they call it "speculation." Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But at least you have been shamed into cleaning up that dump. So you gonna post this???

The logic of a trained Maudite! That property is owned by many people. Yes, it is a teardown and yes something new will be there eventually. That's s what happens to old run down properties. And as an fyi, achievers, people who make things happen in their life, don't see "specualtion" as a dirty word. Your player hating is transparent. I am sure Maud speculated quite a bit to assemble that multi-million dollar portfolio she has, but she doesn't want that widely known as she is the consummate hypocrite. And of course, if you own a house in Vienna (?), you are a speculator too.

I'm a bit confused there Surfer Dude. At what point after the election have I weighed in on this?

Go back and read the post - Nothing in there about speculation being bad. Its the oh woe is me I have been deprived of my rights when I bought the property with my eyes wide open knowing full well what I was buying and now I am supporting Bukont in his zoning request cus if he wins, it opens the door to my zoning request. Yippee. Was that sentence too long for you to follow? Pay attention. Read a bit slower then...

Go back and read the post - Nothing in there about speculation being bad. Its the oh woe is me I have been deprived of my rights when I bought the property with my eyes wide open knowing full well what I was buying and now I am supporting Bukont in his zoning request cus if he wins, it opens the door to my zoning request. Yippee. Was that sentence too long for you to follow? Pay attention. Read a bit slower then...

If Vienna TC continues to make different decisions for different people, which is their ongoing track record, they will lose in court. They will spend taxpayer dollars to lose knowing they would lose all along. Clearly you think this is good government.

>>If Vienna TC continues to make different decisions for different people, which is their ongoing track record, they will lose in court.

Where has TC allowed RM2 zoning at 50% lot coverage?

How very nice of you FACTS to speculate on what other people are going to do. But then again that is how you stay in power isn't it!

Sorry, I assumed that Susan agreed with her supporters' postings on HV.com. If she says she opposes the plan to put condos in place of houses at Berry Street, I'll take her word for it.

Where has TC allowed RM2 zoning at 50% lot coverage?

My comment wasn't related to RM2 specifically, but rather the notion that some in Vienna think that all residential property from this point forward that abuts commercial property should remain single family forever. Not going to happen. Tranistional uses, whatever they may be, have been used for decades. Those uses have applied ONLY to residential property abutting commercial.

I will state, for clarity, where I stand on condos & any other new development in Vienna: I AM FOR RAZING THE ENTIRE TOWN and starting from scratch.

Any sentimentality I have for the town left along with Penguin Feather, Curly's, Kemp Mill Records, Carvel, Dart Drug, Peoples, Pizza Fair, Arthur's, Peter Pan, Vienna Movie theater, Worthington's, Full Cry, Vienna Donuts, and the old Anita's.

$5 for anyone who can remember the old green/white stand that was where Knossos is - Conrans? Conrads? i'm forgetting. $10 for anyone who can name the present business in these locations.

Face it - we killed any cool/kitschy places we had in town. All we have left is the Vienna Inn and Maud Robinson and Jane Seeman are doing their gosh darn best effort to end its run.

Waxing nostalgic, eh? It was Conrad's, at the corner of Lewis and 123. Penguin Feather was where the new Anita's is, in an old house. Curly's, Full Cry and Worthington's were all on the east side of Church, between Center and Lawyers. Pizza Fair was between the hardware store and the cleaner's next to Jammin' Java. The movie theater was where the bike shop is now. The Dart Drug was where the CVS on Cedar Lane is. All CVS's were Peoples. Peter Pan was at the corner of 123 and the entrance to Magruder's. The others are easy as well. Now here's your real flashback: Magruder's used to be an Acme. There was an A&P where the fabric store/That's Amore is. Jammin' Java was a Drug Fair. Where the Town Green is was Garrison's Toys, run by an old English guy. And who can forget the W. T. Grant's store where the auto parts, Michael's, cleaner's and Popeye's stands now? Or that there was an ABC store next to the old Hallmark store? Or the Lowe's that stood vacant for 20 years where we now have a Whole Foods? I've got to stop now; I'm tearing up. Please mail my $15.00 to the address shown below.

Wait a minute...Worthington's was the jewelers next to where Norm's is now. Sorry. Still the worst parking lot in Vienna. Wendy's was a Burger Chef 40 years ago. The only one I ever saw. The original Great Harvest, formerly a health food store, used to be next to Bonaroti's. It was a good place back then. I don't frequent the one on Church.

Dart Drug was where the CVS on Cedar Lane is.
Wasn't Dart where Michael's is, too?

A&P
Only place my mom used to shop

ABC store next to the old Hallmark store?
Ah, yes, but that was well before my alcoholic ways kicked in.

Or the Lowe's that stood vacant for 20 years where we now have a Whole Foods?
My parents house wouldn't have been built without Lowes.

Worthington's was the jewelers next to where Norm's is now.
Nope, that is Ketterman's. You were right the first time.

I forgot about High's - best ice cream around. Or, the kid's clothing store that was where Norm's stands. How about the hobby store where Cenan's is? Or, Vienna Sports. Stride Rite, Potpourri, Chanticleer, Vienna Pizza, Pizza Hut, sigh ...

As I stated before, Vienna lost it's charm years ago. Now, we are left with corporate franchises. Hard to get misty about a Quizno's. Might was well tear it all down & start from scratch.

Mark: Whoops - where were Arthur's & Vienna Donuts for your full $15?!

Still waiting for Susan's position on the condos. . . I sense a wide stance in the works.

Still waiting for Susan's position on the condos...I sense a wide stance in the works.

Only in the petty political mind of the likes of Seeman's rabid daughter or the Town Manager's dim wit son, could Susan's success be a negative (that is who writes the above BTW). She has run two campaigns aimed at rooting out corruption, nepotism and cronyism. Yes, she lost, but she was up against the weight of a 50 year old political machine. She will be back kids...

Will Susan have a position on the condos when she comes back?

Will Susan have a position on the condos when she comes back?

Why don't you just cut to the chase and get the insinuation over with. You don't like success. You love the current TC. Seriously, you have spent a great deal of time NEVER addressing the corruption and selective enforcement of laws by your TC heroes. Not surprising as you have a financial stake in the current TC staying put. Transparent twit.

Cutting to the chase, as you requested: I think Susan entertained the concerns of the Berry Street residents when it was politically advantageous to do so, and now will refuse to take a position on the issue, because opposing the condos now could prove to be counter to her (and your) financial interests. Would you like to address those statements, or do you just want to call me names? Better yet, prove me wrong by posting her position on the issue.

And please list the successes of Susan that you think I am jealous of. I'm not aware of anything she's succeeded at here in Vienna. Did she grow an award-winning turnip or something?

because opposing the condos now could prove to be counter to her (and your) financial interests.

Missed the Susan Stich condo plans. Would you post those?

No one said Susan had condo plans. She does have plans to convert single family housing to some other unknown purpose, but you're all too busy suing the town and otherwise grandstanding to tell anyone what you have in mind.

Still waiting to hear her position on the Berry Street condos. And for your list of her successes of which I am jealous. A photo of the blue-ribbon turnip would suffice.

She does have plans to convert single family housing to some other unknown purpose, but you're all too busy suing the town and otherwise grandstanding to tell anyone what you have in mind.

You are right there is a lawsuit to force Janie and Maudie to explain their little fraudulent historic district under oath. That should be interesting, eh? If that is grandstanding to you, fair enough, expect it to keep coming until dishonesty and corruption is rooted out of Vienna government (that means your mommy or daddy leaving the Vienna power structure). If I was in your position, defending the indefensible, I can see why one tear down house next to the industrial use Vienna post office would be so important to you. You need something to harp on, you need something to try and distract from your mommy or daddy, you need something to try and make Susan and others look like BAD people. I am sure you have a handful of older Vienna residents on the edge of their seat waiting for your next "Susan is an evil conspiracist out to ruin Vienna"...what else you got in your bag of tricks?

What precisely are you accusing me of defending? I've been asking to hear Perennial Candidate Stich's position on the Berry Street condos, and you have done everything in the world except answer that simple question. As usual, silence speaks volumes.

What precisely are you accusing me of defending?

Your mom or dad's corrupt hold on Vienna government.

My father passed away a couple years ago, and my mother is comfortably retired in Maryland. Explain how they have a corrupt hold on Vienna government. And please post the photo of Susan's "best of show" turnip.

Bukont’s proposal for RM-2 is dead. Council turned it down 7 zip. One citizen invoked the 6/7 rules requiring 6 council members to vote in favor of the rezoning Berry Street to RM-2. No further need to bring up RM-2 zoning. Doug D’Alexander was quoted in the Vienna times saying he will now seek T Zone and will seek court intervention if it is not granted. Recommend looking at the T Zone and try to explain how T Zone does not apply to the Berry Street property.

You say...."If Vienna TC continues to make different decisions for different people, which is their ongoing track record, they will lose in court." So how is your Court Case going. When was the last time there was any action. When are we going to see the glorious victory that will vindicate all your teeth gnashing and hand-wringing.

PS... Why do you assume everyone who posts with an opposing view is a son or daughter of a TC member. That would be as silly as assuming that all those frequent posters lashing out at the town are all friends and relatives of a certain "corporation" that have sought to rezone certain lawyers road properties from single family.... that would be just a silly, silly silly thing to assume...

and pps - why did you delete out Vienna Mommy's post about noone associated with this site owning that property??? Does she really think noone knows, and was that just too big of a lie for even this site?

You say...."If Vienna TC continues to make different decisions for different people, which is their ongoing track record, they will lose in court." So how is your Court Case going. When was the last time there was any action. When are we going to see the glorious victory that will vindicate all your teeth gnashing and hand-wringing.

PS... Why do you assume everyone who posts with an opposing view is a son or daughter of a TC member. That would be as silly as assuming that all those frequent posters lashing out at the town are all friends and relatives of a certain "corporation" that have sought to rezone certain lawyers road properties from single family.... that would be just a silly, silly silly thing to assume...

and pps - why did you delete out Vienna Mommy's post about noone associated with this site owning that property??? Does she really think noone knows, and was that just too big of a lie for even this site?

Some questions for you:

Once again, the conspiracy is what?

A group of long time Vienna citizens (this is the "corporation" you refer to) own a house next to the Post Office? What does that prove or show in your mind?

The fact that a group of citizens bought a house in between the industrial use Post Office and a run down former Church means what?

Are you comparing that house to Berry Street houses? What are the commonalities there in your mind?

Does it really mean you were not smart enough to buy this house or perhaps you did not have enough money? Is your whole strategy to "covet" your neighbor and work your other like minded neighbors up to covet too?

Please explain, with all of the houses in Vienna changing hands, how and and why is this one so important to you?

Does the ownership of that house, for example, mean that the owners can't point out that our Mayor routinely lies in public?

Does it mean they can point out that Laurie Cole really did use her position in Town government to make lots of money?

Does the ownership of this house mean the owners can't say that the Council is wrong for not broadcasting meetings?

If we really follow along your logic, the only people who can criticize your TC heroes are who?

Is there some financial/success bar that if exceeded prevents one from pointing out Jane and Maudie's corruption and dishonesty?

HD lawsuit is progressing nicely thank you. Instead of asking private citizens to speak of their case, I am surprised you don't find the time to ask your elected TC leaders about the case. You really are a twit.

PS. Yes, on many posts and comments on this site, people rightfully "lash out" at the dishonesty and corruption of your TC heroes. Why is that bad?

Message from the proud "twit". I'll answer your questions after you answer mine. The point is... you are not an independent party in this discussion. And we both know its not one piece of property. Lay your cards on the table, admit your own financial interests in this debate - be honest about it. And No, I don't covet your property or your life. I can happily get through the day without frothing at the mouth and living in my nicely upkept "teardown." And guess what... Don't particularly like Maud, but the alternative presented was far, far worse.

Message from the proud "twit". I'll answer your questions after you answer mine. The point is... you are not an independent party in this discussion. And we both know its not one piece of property. Lay your cards on the table, admit your own financial interests in this debate - be honest about it. And No, I don't covet your property or your life. I can happily get through the day without frothing at the mouth and living in my nicely upkept "teardown." And guess what... Don't particularly like Maud, but the alternative presented was far, far worse.

You have no questions or debate. People that have more than you are somehow less than you - that's your position hidden in your rambles. That can't be argued with. To show you how silly your reasoning is, why don't you lay your "financial interests" on the table (whatever the hell that means exactly)? Dumb logic. And clearly you believe people who have achieved more success than you are not allowed to criticize corrupt and dirty politicians.

So when anyone disagrees with you, they are one of three things: 1) a twit; 2) son or daughter of TC; or 3) jealous of you. What a hoot. Why don't you accuse me of being a son or daughter then I will hit the jack-pot. And au contraire, I have lots of questions. You just chose not to anwer them.