Berry Street Condo Rezoning Hearing

Update: TC voted against this rezoning.

For clarification, the Council voted against the Berry Street condos. The request for a down-zoning of the old 7-11 on Glyndon was withdrawn - no action taken.

Steve: Get in line with the new owners of the Flea Trap motel. You know those guys will file suit when Vienna eventually turns down the rezoning of their properties.

Change will come.

This is another example of mob rules in Vienna. Precedent means nothing. One group gets something, the other doesn't and there is no reason or explanation given as to why each group got something different. My comments are not for or against Berry Street, but simply pointing out that Vienna government has become a patchwork quilt of decision-making, designed to appease whoever yells the loudest or who is best friend of Maud at the moment. Problem? Well, eventually we all pay the piper once this bubble of inequality is pierced.

I applaud the citizens coming out to engage in the political goings on in Vienna. I am in agreement with their position.

Fact: It doesn't end here. This will end up in court, and a lawsuit. Don't be fooled by the words of the TC, Maud or Seeman.

There are plenty of examples where previous landowners got what they wanted under similar circumstances, so legal precedent has been set, and the TC knows this, so in fact they are saving face, yes, but they know full well in the end they will get what they want built there, and it will cost the Town a lot of money to go to court and defend a TC who in has not shown they can be impartial and above board with these type of decisions. We are still dealing with TC elected officials, yes, but still acting like a bunch of small town biddies, pretending to be voice of the people, when they know full well, two houses will never get built on this property.

So, save face, but waste money, all so they can get re-elected.

It's a fine mess they got us into.

Honest and open government is so foreign to this town, the people have gotten the idea that what happened last Monday was honest and open government.

Open your eyes, Vienna, and realize, you have just been taken to the cleaners. The people don't give a hoot about your desires, it's all about them.

Don't believe me? Read the minutes very carefully, oops, I forgot, the minutes are not verbatim... it's a pity we don't have Video taping of the meeting on line. Now do you wonder why they don't want these meetings taped and aired online? This way they can keep getting elected.

The tape shows their true character: did you see the disdain Seeman had for the first two speakers. Look closely. Oops, I forgot, you can't... no tape.

Maybe HV will post the video that someone taped that night, or are we going to have to beg for that footage?

Yell, yes, but you still have to pay.

I wonder how TC will rule when plan B for the old 7-11 site is a 4 story office building with underground parking. Or a construction property yard for his home business... he's running out of storage space in the house and garage across the street from his house.

it's more than just inequality--it's illegal. zoning is supposed to be logical and reasonable, not arbitrary and capricious.

Essentially the TC eliminated transitional rezonings from the code Monday night. After that clearly there will never be transitional zoning in Vienna again, even though its on the books and the precedent is there. You can't give it to one group and not to others. One neighbor, against condos, was asked walking out of Town Hall Monday night if he was ready for the court case to follow. He looked shocked. It had not even crossed his mind that the case was not over. He assumed that was it. Better yet, his buddy, another neighbor, scoffed saying the TC had a big legal war chest (oh really?) and they would bleed the builders dry. All of sudden, some of these neighbors, positioned as sweet and innocent, seem to be well aware of the role they are playing in the game. My comments are not for or against the condos. I am against, as Anne says, arbitrary and capricious behavior. And Vienna is loaded with that.

Though I did not attend the meeting, I am aware of one gentlemen saying that he will never, ever vote for any of the TC members and Mayor again if they approve Steve Bukont's apartments. He got a huge applause from the audience.

That, my friend, is how and why decisions are made in Vienna. The absolute FEAR of not being reelected by the 1000 people who vote every year makes Maud, Jane, George & gang actually piddle in their pants. By voting against Bukont, these idiot politicians are just happy to have sealed (in their minds) another 200 votes ad infinitum.

Fear should not guide decisions. Common sense, logic and intelligence should prevail.

One neighbor there, so inexperienced on development ssues, wanted a full explanation on the engineering of storm water management facilities. That's fine, she is entitled. But clearly this nice lady had never been into a Home Depot in her life, and the storm water explanation meant nothing to her. This same lady wanted to know if the builders live in Vienna. Time after time, irrelevant arguments were made, never addressing the core issue: if Bukont doesn't get a rezoning, why did comparable properties get one in the past? This whole issue really, once again, has nothing to do with Berry Street or Bukont, it has to do with fair decisions applied equally.

I wonder how TC will rule when plan B for the old 7-11 site is a 4 story office building with underground parking. Or a construction property yard for his home business... he's running out of storage space in the house and garage across the street from his house.

Since it is his right to build commercial there, don't be surprised. Why is this donut hole of commercial nonsense even in existence? Maud and her cronies either did not have the foresight or creativity to solve it long ago. Dislike Bukont if you will, as he is no innocent on many matters, but this old 7-11 zoning disaster rests with the Vienna TC.

Re: it's more than just inequality--it's illegal. zoning is supposed to be logical and reasonable, not arbitrary and capricious.

This is exactly why there are already several lawsuits against the Town of Vienna. The "Historic Review Board... as if we have anything historic..." has been doling out arbitrary and capricious decisions, based solely upon whether the majority of the board members like you or not.

Simple as that. No other reason, just plain backroom dealings and cronyism.

Helluva way to run a town.

Essentially the TC eliminated transitional rezonings from the code Monday night.

Not really, but regardless of that, Bukont's Berry Street condo rezoning request never satisfied the letter, spirit, nor intent of transitional zoning as it is defined in the Town zoning code. In this case, I see no arbitrary and capricious ruling by TC and no legal recourse for Bukont other than to develop property legally.

Bukont knew his Berry Street rezoning request was without merit to begin with when he bundled it with the old 7-11 down zoning request, offering to take a $400k hit on that property to conform it to its single-family residential surroundings (his neighborhood) and hoping TC would kiss him up and down for this bribe. Why not... it's worked before with Seeman's bookcases and Cole's old kitchen and new house, right? But he failed to realize that TC could care less about conforming the old 7-11 property... they've overlooked it for decades and are not about to risk their tenuous grip on Town government for it. Seriously, there was nothing in it for them except voter outrage.

Bukont is now a lover spurned and will throw one of his infamous temper tantrums. A lawsuit? He'd be wetting his own bed. More likely he will build something inappropriate... he's good at that.

I also support zoning that is logical and reasonable, not arbitrary and capricious. Meanwhile, Maud would have her knickers in a twist if she saw the attractive mixed-use development that will soon be going up in Merrifield:

http://www.mosaicatmerrifield.com/viscent.htm

Bet he comes back with a transitional office building proposal for Berry Street. His whole pitch was that condos were less intrusive than a transitional office building - which his attorney argued have been granted across Vienna to like properties. Hate or love him, that argument is valid and the TC did not address it. Ayrhill Homes did not pay to have this guy sitting there for no reason. Perhaps ultimately Ayr Hill homes loses, but the TC should at least be logical.

>>Bet he comes back with a transitional office building proposal for Berry Street. His whole pitch was that condos were less intrusive than a transitional office building - which his attorney argued have been granted across Vienna to like properties.

Classic Chewbacca defense... option A is not as bad as option B... never mind the fact that the site is not an appropriate site for either option. The only thing transitional about it is that they want to transition it from low-density single-family residential to high-density.

>>Hate or love him, that argument is valid and the TC did not address it.

That argument may or may not be valid, but it does not change application of the current zoning code to the Berry Street request. It amounts to the lawyer arguing an irrelevant observation with himself... there was no need for TC to participate.

>>Ayrhill Homes did not pay to have this guy sitting there for no reason.

True, they hoped to bull their way through the only stage in the process where bullshit might work. It didn't. Now if they want to go to court before a judge, they have to come up with something better than bullshit from their lawyer. If they had that, they wouldn't have had to hire the guy to do a Chewbacca defense in council chambers. Greed... if Bukont hadn't wanted it so bad, he could have seen that his rezoning proposal wouldn't fly and saved himself some time and money. But those past little scraps he's been getting under the table has clouded his judgement.

>>Perhaps ultimately Ayr Hill homes loses, but the TC should at least be logical.

They handled it... they honored the zoning code and their tax payers. Bukont lives and builds in Vienna... he won't take on city hall. It's very logical... Bukont loses this one. Look for the temper tantrum.

TG what then are the rules as to whether residential property bordering C1 can receive a transitional zoning or not? There have many cases in Vienna over the years where residential bordering C1 commercial either became low density office buildings or town houses. What are the rules given the past precedent? Whether you like SB or not (and obviously some of his public actions deserved high criticism)...but this all needs to make sense for Vienna ongoing.

...they honored the zoning code and their tax payers...

Serious question to that comment: If we go up and down Maple Avenue, both sides of the street, what residential property that abuts commercially zoned property can apply and receive an alternate use beyond single family zoning? If that question can't be answered, we got Town wide problems that will ultimately lead to less zoning control in the hands of the TC.

TG what then are the rules as to whether residential property bordering C1 can receive a transitional zoning or not? There have many cases in Vienna over the years where residential bordering C1 commercial either became low density office buildings or town houses. What are the rules given the past precedent? Whether you like SB or not (and obviously some of his public actions deserved high criticism)...but this all needs to make sense for Vienna ongoing.

See my previous discussion of this issue. It can be confusing, but the facts are in the code. Pay close attention to the difference between transistional RM-2 zoning and T-Zoning. Whether one or the other, the whole point of transitional is to make the best use of problematic property bordering low-density residential zoning such that the problems are minimized and the residential areas are buffered. Bukont's Berry Street proposal did not satisfy transitional RM-2 nor T-zoning and did not solve any particular border problems. Instead, it would have injected problems into that neighborhood. The two existing single-family lots on Berry Street are not problematic. Sorry, Stephen... put some houses on them and get over it.

I'm not going to review old developments across Vienna. Doing the right thing going forward is all that matters, regardless of how bad anyone wants to cash in their chips. The whole reason we have zoning laws is to NOT BUILD the crap that people built in the past. Unfortunately, zoning laws still don't prevent Bukont from building old-fashioned high-maintenance energy-inefficient buildings... on the cheap.

Serious question to that comment: If we go up and down Maple Avenue, both sides of the street, what residential property that abuts commercially zoned property can apply and receive an alternate use beyond single family zoning? If that question can't be answered, we got Town wide problems that will ultimately lead to less zoning control in the hands of the TC.

Generally speaking, none. The Maple Avenue commercial corridor is cooked. Show me an instance where converting single-family residential zoning to RM-2 zoning would be APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY to buffer a residential neighborhood from VERY HIGH-DENSITY COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL zoning activities? And how would that increased density improve traffic on our very limited 2-lane road network?

You might be able to find a few properties suitable for T-zoning, but those would have to become OFFICES that conform highly with the surrounding residential zoning land use requirements and construction forms. That is, they would be small, cute, low-density developments with low traffic volume.

Bukont could pursue T-zoning on Berry Street but what problem would it solve? The current lots are perfectly serviceable house lots. Only a developer would argue that we must cannibalize our residential neighborhoods to protect them. And only a developer's lawyer would argue, 'hey, it's screwed up over there and over there, so let us screw it up over here'.

The kind of redevelopment Vienna needs is not one off stuff shoved in here and squeezed in there. There needs to be a formal urban redevelopment plan and then entire blocks need to be razed and rebuilt into open-air pedestrian-friendly shops and restaurants that blend into the surrounding neighborhoods. Then you might see fit to annex some bordering residential properties.

Why did everyone give a loud applause after the votes of the members when they said they were voting against Bukont? It reminded more of a TV show like "To tell the truth" than an official counsel chambers. aybe I am old fashioned, but it was very unprofessional and demeaning.

Vienna Council Nixes Condo Proposal
by BRIAN TROMPETER, Staff Writer
(Created: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 2:35 PM EDT)

Vienna's Murmuring Pines neighborhood will not be getting condominiums anytime soon.

The Vienna Town Council on Sept. 10 unanimously rejected AyrHill Homes' proposal to build 22 condominiums on combined lots at 117 East St., S.E., and 116 Berry St., S.E.

Town Council members, after hearing uniformly negative comments from surrounding neighbors of the site, said the development might destabilize the neighborhood.

“This is a logical place to hold the line,” said Council member Laurie Cole.

Council member George Lovelace agreed with that view.

“Single-family residential is the best use for this property,” he said. “I think this is a chance to say what we're made of.”

The proposed development already faced an uphill climb after the Vienna Planning Commission unanimously rejected it on May 9. Scores of neighbors who attended that meeting and an April 19 public hearing said the project was not in keeping with the neighborhood's low-density residential character.

To make matters tougher, a protest petition signed by surrounding property owners meant that proposal would have required a super-majority of at least six of the seven Vienna Town Council members to pass.

AyrHill Homes had proposed building two condominium buildings with 11 units apiece. The site's lots, which cover a total of 1.01 acres, each measures 100 feet wide by 220 feet deep and has a single-family house built in the early 1950s.

The proposed development had included 44 underground parking spaces - two for each unit - plus six above-ground visitor spaces. Primary vehicular access would be from East Street, but parking for those with disabilities at Building No. 1 would have been accessible via a separate entrance on Berry Street.

The developer also proposed building a 6-foot-high masonry wall between the development and adjacent commercial properties.

The condominiums would have cost about $500,000 each, said Lynne Strobel, an attorney for the developer.

Placing multi-family housing on the site would diversify the town's housing stock and provide a transition between the neighborhood and aging nearby commercial properties along Maple Avenue, which likely will be redeveloped with higher density, Strobel told the Town Council.

While the project would have required 50-percent lot coverage - double that normally allowed in Vienna's residential areas - this figure was less than the 60- to 70-percent coverage that has been granted in transitional-zone developments elsewhere in town, Strobel said.

But Dennis Adams, who lives at 210 East St., S.E., said the parking lots behind commercial buildings occupied by SunTrust Bank, Anita's “New Mexico-Style” Mexican Food and Karin's Florist have served as a transitional area since 1963.

Neighboring residents packed the council chamber on Monday night and none of those who spoke favored the condominium project.

Vienna resident Michael Trivisonno told the council that approving the development would have set a bad precedent for the town.

“When I read this application, my head was swimming,” he said.

09/11/2007
Vienna rejects condo application
Monty Tayloe

The Vienna Town Council voted unanimously to deny a rezoning application that would have allowed 22 condominiums on the edge of Vienna's Murmuring Pines neighborhood.

"It's my belief that a rezoning would change the character of the neighborhood," said Mayor Jane Seeman, before voting to deny the application.

While the entire Town Council echoed her comments, a more substantial reason for the body's vote was the council chamber full of Murmuring Pines neighbors opposed to the application.

"This is why we voted for you," neighborhood resident Dennis Adams told the council.

"And if you approve this I won't vote for you again." Overwhelming applause from the gathered crowd followed Adams' declaration.

"One way to determine if something is good for the town is to listen to the town," Councilman George Lovelace said.

The application, from Steve Bukont and Doug Alexander of Ayr Hill Homes, requested the rezoning of two adjacent residential lots on Berry Street from single-family zoning to a "multifamily," or apartment, use. The rezoning would have been the first step in allowing the company to build two three-story condo units on the property, which is in a neighborhood of large, single-family homes.

The applicants maintain that their proposed condominium would not have been out of place in a neighborhood that borders several commercial properties, and would provide a housing alternative for people who cannot afford Vienna's high home prices. However, the latter argument was somewhat undercut when Ayr Hill Homes representative Lynn Stroebel revealed that the projected price of the units would be about $500,000 each.

"Who is that affordable housing for?" asked Councilwoman Laurie Cole, after the meeting.

Alexander said he and Bukont will reapply, seeking a rezoning classification to "transitional zoning." Alexander said he believes they will have a stronger argument under that classification and that legal precedent will support them.

"Twice before, the council has denied applications for transitional zoning and both times they were overturned by the state Supreme Court," Alexander said. "We're willing to go that far."

Amended Berry Street Project in Vienna

Notice that a mixed use code is being used to maximize the amount of space.

This is the plans for the new Tequila Grande and Wolftrap Hotel properties... Nice, aren't they. I know Maud will eventually roll over on these, simply because there won't be any problems with parking or water runoff. Really.

Alexander said he and Bukont will reapply, seeking a rezoning classification to "transitional zoning." Alexander said he believes they will have a stronger argument under that classification and that legal precedent will support them.

"Twice before, the council has denied applications for transitional zoning and both times they were overturned by the state Supreme Court," Alexander said. "We're willing to go that far."

It's 'T-Zoning', Doug. When and where? Times have changed. If you want to waste your time, money, and reputation in Vienna taking 1 acre of land to the state supreme court, go right ahead! And why settle for plan B T-Zoning? Take plan A transistional RM2 zoning to Richmond... unless, of course, you know it's a loser. Only a loser would make a chump remark like yours... threathening to sue our Town of Vienna over a rezoning request that has not yet been submitted nor ruled upon... that's a cute little mini-me temper tantrum you published there, Doug... very professional!

Some advice for you with your newfound insight into legal precedent... win or lose, your lawyers will get paid. So go ahead and pursue T-Zoning... the neighborhood will protest, the Town will deny, your lawyers will take you to the supreme court and to the cleaners, you may get to build some cutesy low-density house-like offices again subject to the T-Zoning approval process, and then you get to hang up some more For Lease banners and sit back and relax and wait and wait and wait... leasing office space sure ain't as sweet as selling off condos at $500-$750k a pop, is it.

Doesn't anyone get that it was Maud who is responsible for this zoning in first place? These decisions like them or not are able to be overturned by the Court because they are arbitrary and capricious. Try to do this in Alexandria. You wouldn't and couldn't because there exists consistent zoning laws and rules that are followed and enforced.
It seems like Murmuring Pines has played right into TC hands. When Ayr Hill takes the Town to court (I wonder who will pay that one too) the TC can throw up their hands and say "we tried-sorry." The question becomes do you understand that it isn't the developer, it is flimsiness of the zoning laws that allowed this to happen? We can debate all we want to about developers, but it is the leadership or lack there of that has allowed this to happen here and all over Vienna. There is no White Knight for you Murmuring Pines. You have been duped. Vote Maud!

So go ahead and pursue T-Zoning... the neighborhood will protest, the Town will deny, your lawyers will take you to the supreme court and to the cleaners, you may get to build some cutesy low-density house-like offices again subject to the T-Zoning approval process, and then you get to hang up some more For Lease banners and sit back and relax and wait and wait and wait... leasing office space sure ain't as sweet as selling off condos at $500-$750k a pop, is it.

How is this smart behavior on the Town's part? Is the idea to make developers jump through hoops, knowing full well there is merit to their case, just so at the end Vienna ends up with something that ain't close to optimal? This all sounds like player hating to me.

Times have changed.

What does that mean exactly?

I may actually be the only person who thought the plan was a good idea. We do need some nice garden apartments. Yes, unfortunately, 500K is affordable in Vienna when the average new home is selling for 1.5M. Older homes are still 600-800k.

A couple nearing retirement, who may not want to leave the area, could sell their 700K Barrister's home & move to a nice condo that is walking distance to town.

We need this type of dwelling in Vienna. The current apartments/condos in town do not quite cut it for most middle-income earners. More luxuries are demanded by buyers these days.

>>How is this smart behavior on the Town's part? Is the idea to make developers jump through hoops, knowing full well there is merit to their case, just so at the end Vienna ends up with something that ain't close to optimal?

Whether or not there is merit to their case is subjective. I would say there is no merit in their case, but they may have some legal grounds within the law, flawed as laws often are. The community has a right to not want something done in their community that they feel is adverse and undesirable. If a developer wants to argue the matter down to its legal brass tacks, he can, but the community still has a right to protest and resist however they can. Of course, the Town needs to exercise better control over its destiny, but its failings in this regard... its inadequate planning and zoning, however you want to argue it... does not mean the community should rollover and play dead while private individuals exploit the situation for their personal gain. The community and their elected representatives, the Town Council, have the right to resist, no matter how poorly they go about it.

Town Council's ruling was a no-brainer to agree with their constituents and with the Planning Commission's unanimous decision. And at the same time, they publically rebuffed Bukont and the tarnish he has put on them.

>>This all sounds like player hating to me.

No, it's community.

>>Times have changed.
>>>>What does that mean exactly?

It means you can't just assume 2 instances of alleged legal precedent from then and there will automatically translate to Berry Street some time in the future. As I see it, legal precedent is just so much hot air until there is a concurring decision in court after the facts of the case are fully discovered. And that is a pretty significant hike to take just to build some conforming house-like offices on 1 acre. Bukont wanted to sell 22 condos and be done with it... not build and lease more rotting buildings that he will have to maintain.

The Town has a clear track record of just saying "no", losing in court, and winding up with worse than what they would have got if they had negotiated to begin with. IMHO this is a terrible way to run a government. Most of those Berry Street people had no clue a court case was coming. We will have to agree to disagree here.

"One way to determine if something is good for the town is to listen to the town," Councilman George Lovelace said.

Another way is to put your head in a hole and breathe dirt.

>>Most of those Berry Street people had no clue a court case was coming. We will have to agree to disagree here.

We both know that they are not that naive. They resisted a proposal that was unacceptable and that does not conform to the zoning code. Even Bukont knows this and he will never take that proposal to a lawsuit. Next proposal?

This is a fun thread. I gather that the messages HV.com is trying to communicate are that (1) Maud is bad, (2) tearing down single family homes and replacing them with condos is good, and (3) respecting community input is tantamount to mob rule. Taking each point in turn:

(1) We know you think Maud is bad. Bravo for saying it again. And again. And again.

(2) Your arguments in favor of tearing down houses and replacing them with condos don't hold water. Mixed use development along 123 would be a good thing if it replaced old properties like the motel and tired strip malls. That's a far cry from taking a chunk out of a neighborhood of single family homes and jamming in condos and a parking garage. Vague statements that someone somewhere got away with it in the past hardly justify doing it now. And I wouldn't describe 22 condos perched over a parking garage on a single acre as "nice garden apartments".

(3) Arguing that the town council is wrong to listen to the community affected by the development is so off-track that I don't even know where to start. Zoning changes always need community input. Wouldn't you appreciate the opportunity to have your voice heard if a developer wanted to build a crematorium next to your house?

So what we have here are people who have bought a number of single family properties in NW Vienna, who are arguing that the town must allow single family homes to be torn down and replaced with multifamily dwellings, who are saying that the town will be sued if such development isn't approved, and who are saying that the input of the affected community is irrelevant. You're revealing more than you realize, I think.

...Your arguments in favor of tearing down houses and replacing them with condos don't hold water...Vague statements that someone somewhere got away with it in the past hardly justify doing it now...Arguing that the town council is wrong to listen to the community affected by the development is so off-track that I don't even know where to start. Zoning changes always need community input...people who have bought a number of single family properties in NW Vienna, who are arguing that the town must allow single family homes to be torn down and replaced with multifamily dwellings, who are saying that the town will be sued if such development isn't approved, and who are saying that the input of the affected community is irrelevant.

1. Just like with the historic district issues, we seek fairness. The only properties that have a plausible argument to obtain transitional zoning (a zoning created by Maud BTW) are single family properties bordering commercial zoning. That's it. That's limited. And its not a new concept. So should people be criticized for buying one of these special residential properties or scorned? We know your answer.

2. Steve Bukont was originally slammed on this site due to his role on the Historic Review Board and dealings with Laurie Cole. He was not picked on for building 100 new $1.5 million dollars houses in Vienna or building an office building on Church Street. Those are assets whether you nitpick his style or his maxing Vienna's zoning code or not. Clearly, some in Vienna are jealous of his success.

3. No one said the TC should not listen to citizens. But lynch mobs, which we have seen plenty of in the historic district disaster, are disgusting. There are plenty of nuts in NW in the historic district who have engaged in every lie under the sun to keep this say nothing ordinance on the books. If Vienna can't move away from the subjective, squishy nonsense of which you speak, there will continue to be conflict.

4. Anyone who is treated differently than precedent set by Vienna TC, or differently than another group, should sue. Absolutely. The courts have historically whacked Vienna every time. The process? Rezoning comes in. Lynch mob forms. Goes to court. Town loses. Project is built. TC saves face saying they tried to hold the line. Lots of time and energy is wasted on all sides. This could only happen in a community where class warfare is a winning argument and bitter non-achievers are entrenched in power.

You should be saluted for your post though. That is the exact sh** that Maud uses to stay in office. But you already know that, you & your family are right there with her receiving your TC benefits ($), even if they are indirect. I highly recommend passing your post out at Magruders on Tuesday.

Completely different topic. Has anyone noticed the calculated move this spring to start reporting Maud's age as 80? It was listed as such in a Washington Post article:

Washington Post

Maud is clearly born April 15, 1922. She is 85. This information can be found in almost any quick search online.

Why the "age" lift? Are we not proud of being a senior? Do we fear not being reelected if most people realized you'd be 87 when your term is up?

If anyone can find an article from the last time she ran in '05 with an older age, I'd like to see.

Bukont's just trying to do condos because he knows the gravy train he's been on has ended. The luxury homes he specializes in are no longer the sure-fire money maker they've been for him for the past few years. I'm sure he WISHES that new homes were selling for an average of $1.5M in Vienna.... but the AVERAGE has to be closer to $1M at best.

Most of Bukont's stuff sells in the $1M-$1.2M range. Given that he's paying $500K+ for some of the new properties he's working (example: the current 904 Glyndon Street property for $530K), the big profits simply aren't there any more... On the other hand, if you can convince the town to let you build and sell 22 condos for $500K off a one acre property, you can make a whole pile of money.

The fact is, the majority of the town doesn't want condos - they want Vienna to stay a single family home community. In reality, thats what the last election was about. So in this case, the Town Council is doing what the voters elected them to do.

Personally, with older homes selling in the $500-600k's now (not the $600-800K referenced above), I don't know why anyone would want to pay $500K for a condo next to parking lot anyway.... but I'm continually baffled by the real estate decisions of people in the Washington area, so I have no doubt they'd be able to sell them.

The fact is, the majority of the town doesn't want condos - they want Vienna to stay a single family home community. In reality, thats what the last election was about. So in this case, the Town Council is doing what the voters elected them to do.

So the current garden apartments, condos, and town houses around Vienna were all just "mistakes" that slipped through the cracks? But now Vienna is set to stop any future mistakes?

Actually, the FACT is that about 800 of Maud's retired and 80+ year old friends showed up to vote. The majority of the Town has no idea how something gets built or not built in Vienna...including clearly you.

No one here is supporting condos in the middle of residential neighborhoods, but condos in Vienna along and near the commercial corridor are coming, regardless of how much you whine...and they are a good thing supported by many. So keep spreading that fear, keep old people afraid! Keep the class warfare going! Hell, I am sure the "developers will force you to eat cat food" scare tactics will be trotted out soon enough. You actually sound like Dennis Adams from Monday night.

Almost forgot, why don't you at least admit before you post that you are living in a tear down house, are unhappy about what you have and covet anything your neighbor has more than you? Clearly, you could have done without every house Bukont has built. That makes you someone in the distinct minority and obviously very jealous.

Most of Bukont's stuff sells in the $1M-$1.2M range. Given that he's paying $500K+ for some of the new properties he's working (example: the current 904 Glyndon Street property for $530K), the big profits simply aren't there any more... On the other hand, if you can convince the town to let you build and sell 22 condos for $500K off a one acre property, you can make a whole pile of money.

So how much money have you made from real estate in Vienna? Last I checked everyone who owns is making money. So the issue comes down to Bukont is making too much? You of course get to decide what it is too much? And just so I am clear, nothing Bukont has built should have been built in Vienna? You haven't said that, but you are implying it. So please, fill us all in with your view.

The amazing thing about the arguments from 'You're kidding me, right?' and 'Maud bad, condos good' is that there is NO argument. It's just say "no". How can you people, if you have a shred of intelligence, not see an aging residential and commercial building stock across Vienna? How can you not see inconsistent and nonconforming structures across Vienna that have aged beyond their useful life? Of course you see it all, but your "no" argument is designed to achieve one thing: continued political power. Achievement, leadership and solutions for Vienna don't matter to you. That's fine. It's your position. Just be clear about it.

The new home sales "facts." The average new home in Vienna is NOT 1M. The average new home is more like 1.5M.

Bukont just sold a house at 306 Ayito SE:

08/07/2007
$2,196,891

Others in SE he has sold this year - price of land going down - price of houses going up:

912 Glyndon SE
06/11/2007
$1,993,434

315 Ayito SE
05/22/2007
$1,550,000

2461 Fardale (the one that looks oddly like the Salisbury House)
09/15/2006
$1,856,530

Bukont bought these properties to tear down:

108 Kingsley SE
07/19/2007
$565,000

303 Ayito SE
07/03/2007
$520,000
11,620 sq foot lot

904 Glyndon SE
03/19/2007
$530,000

109 Kingsley SE
07/24/2006
$595,000

927 Glyndon SE
06/07/2005
$625,000

Sales by others around town:

601 Park Street SE
9/04/2007
$1,550,000

409 MacArthur NE
08/31/2007
$1,430,000

371 Church Street NE (note: This house is 1.5 years old - not brand new)
08/30/2007
$1,385,000

623 Welles SE
06/18/2007
$1,525,000

502 MacArthur NE
04/10/2007
$1,367,281

702 Hine Street SE
04/03/2007
$1,475,000

603 Glyndon Street SE
03/28/2007
$1,420,000

102 Battle Street SW
11/22/2006
$1,350,000

205 Mashie Drive SE
10/20/2006
$1,535,000

419 Orchard Street NW
09/19/2006
$1,610,000

Today's Washington Post brings new insight into lawsuits, legal precedent, the Virginia Supreme Court, and how times have changed:

Yesterday, the Virginia Supreme Court weighed in on the contentious issue with a decision that overturns a nearly 70-year-old precedent. Now, for the first time, homeowners can sue to force a neighbor to cut back branches or roots or take out the tree altogether if it poses a risk of "actual harm" or an "imminent danger" to their houses, the court ruled. Tree owners can now be held liable for any damage caused by the tree.

The reasoning? The court realized just how much Virginia has changed.

And so goes Vienna... planning and zoning deserves new scrutiny so we don't get stuck with 22 three-story condos on 1 acre with virtually no unreserved public parking in our single-family residential neighborhoods.

Now don't get carried away with this tree thing, Vienna. Be a good neighbor no matter how obnoxious your neighbor's trees are. And beware that builder's careless bulldozer. And check your homeowners insurance!

"Who is that affordable housing for?" asked Councilwoman Laurie Cole, after the meeting.

Seriously, Laurie, there are not TWENTY-TWO people out of the ONE MILLION living in Fairfax County who would think a $500k luxury condo within walking distance of downtown Vienna and Tyson's Corner is a steal?!

HOGWASH, lady.

You just keep spouting this nonsensical gibber jabber to keep your "supporters" thinking you somehow relate.

We all know that 706 Spring Street is assessed at $1,268,000. You want to live in a brand new "McMansion" just as much as the next Bukont home buyer.

You'd probably buy your $500k condo tomorrow if it was time for you to retire and downsize.

Quite happy living in my aging late 1960's house in SE... an area filled with younger families, many of whom also voted for the status quo (at least the ones I talk to).

Never said I didn't like Bukont's houses - I just don't want condos. Don't want them in residential, don't want them on 123. For me, "mixed use" = condos. Commerical = stores.

And yes, for some of us that was what we voted for - not because we're old people who are friends of Maude, people related to Maude, or even people who LIKE Maude. So you can continue to rail on that we're all idiots, but I predict the next election result will still go the same way.

Vienna Mommy-

Point taken... that's a good analysis indicating the big new homes sold over the past year are averaging in the $1.5M range. I guess when you're paying $500-600K to tear the whole thing down, there's not much choice but to chase after the top end of the buyer's market.

That said, a dump of overall single home sales for the first three weeks in August shows a little less froth in the current market, even counting 306 Ayito:

22180 Home Sales 8/1/07 - 8/21/07

104 Patrick St Sw $565,000
703 Talahi Ct Se $915,000
601 Echols St Se $520,000
306 Westview Ct Ne $825,000
426 Blair Rd Nw $550,000
601 Bruton Pl $785,000
501 Echols St Se $679,900
2602 Amanda Ct $955,000
8328 Wesleyan St $561,000
306 Ayito Rd Se $2,196,891
307 Mashie Dr Se $655,000
109 Melody Ln Sw $508,668
109 Elm St Sw $492,000
2405 Holt St $590,000
217 Ceret Ct Sw $785,000
424 Yeonas Dr Sw $480,000

AVERAGE PRICE $753,966
MEDIAN PRICE $622,500

Given that the market trends are downwards, I still say that's why the developers are pushing condos. You can make a lot more profit quickly so long as you can sell them.

And the very next sentence in that article in the Post was:

The justices ruled in a Fairfax County case that the old law made perfect sense in a rural world, but now, with townhouse and condo developments springing up on former farmland, with infill development in cities and densely packed neighborhoods, the law "is unsuited to modern urban and suburban life."

They changed the tree law due to infill development! This article in no way makes a case against a rezoning on Berry Street.

But you know what you will probably be able to sue for? Duplicitous neighbors who knowingly organize lynch mobs around false arguments to ruin the value of their neighbors property in spite of past precedent. Not saying you are doing that TG, but people in this Town are.

Quite happy living in my aging late 1960's house in SE...

Quite possibly one of the biggest lies posted yet here. You follow values and other's wealth way too much for anyone to believe you.

For me, "mixed use" = condos. Commerical = stores.

Can you explain this further? It makes no sense. I would rather hear you explain, then just call you a moron outright.

Do I really "follow values and other's wealth" or do I just know how to use the Internet, HV?

http://www.trulia.com

Vienna Mommy's the one who called the value of these houses... I'm the one who underestimated them.

And my bank account's just fine, thank you. :)

I would make a guess that most houses priced under $600K in Vienna will eventually be torn down.

Therefore, that is a land price.

A house that sells for $700-1M most likely will not be a tear down but we know that $1.3M for a tear down in Vienna has been done before and will be done again.

>>They changed the tree law due to infill development! This article in no way makes a case against a rezoning on Berry Street.

It speaks to the vulnerability of legal precedent in the face of changing circumstances. It is sort of odd that the court would be so considerate. But their reaction to infilling... concerning trees of all things... does not signal support for higher density and overdevelopment. That is left to the community.

And I need to correct something... Bukont's condo proposal at 50% lot coverage is actually 22 condos, 50 parking spaces, driveways, and a 400' brick wall on a half acre, not one acre. As Frank would say, "Holy crap!".

If we wait long enough, I suspect the $1.5M houses will get torn down too.

We've got a long way to go before all the current sub $600K houses are torn down!