- Lee Square
That be the Lee Square development accross from KC’s. It stopped after a couple of the buildings were started as the builder went bankrupt and the bank that loaned the builder the money went bankrupt. After that, it ended up in the hands of the FDIC when they siezed the bank. The builder put siding on those units in order to preserve them. The City had to put some money into it to finish the curb/gutter and some paving work to make the site safe.
The note on the site has been purchased by K. Hovnanian and they want to finish the project. They came to the land use meeting Thursday to request some proffer modifications – mainly in reducing the amount of brick facing on interior walls – to make the project viable again.
For my part, I’m not especially wound up to modify the proffers but the changes have been pretty carefully crafted to reduce the visual impact on the project. The LU committee sent the builder back to work with staff to finalize changes and bring it back in January.
December 12, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Reduce the visual impact…what a polite phrase. Unless you’re standing right there, it’s hard to see how looming and over-large these buildings are, how too-close they are to four lanes of tightly squeezed traffic, and how poorly constructed they seem to be, with siding that looks like it’s about to pop off, and mud from weather and traffic splashing up on the front doors and windows. The irony is that Habitat for Humanity, whose ReStore is directly across the street, could have built them better.
December 12, 2009 at 3:27 pm
FWIW, The siding will come off and the buildings will be bricked. The old developer sided them on a weekend (when we have no staff around) in order to preserve the building. The City gave them some leeway and hopefully the buildings will either be bricked or torn down and rebuilt.
December 12, 2009 at 8:55 pm
I was wondering why they look so awful and seen to have been going nowhere for quite awhile.
That said, this complex is a design disaster. I don’t care how much a new developer dresses them up, the fundamental flaw of their proximity to traffic can’t be fixed by bricks and paint. these are residential right? Two steps out the door and a child or animal or whatever is in a VERY busy street. Has the City no setback requirements?
December 13, 2009 at 9:01 am
These were approved before my time so I don’t know all of the particulars. I expect they were zoned B3.5 which doesn’t have setback requirements. During the meeting, Jon Way asked about the proximity of the buildings to the street but the new owner wasn’t prepared to do anything about it. They didn’t say this but they have an approved plan and can build it as-is. I would imagine that the other part of the equation is that all of the sitework sppears to have been done – roads and everything else are already built….
December 13, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Not on your watch, but you supported the rezoning:
http://www.manassascity.org/Archive.aspx?ADID=1083
12 more oversized buildings to come? The first two don’t look like the upscale, quality development that was presented to the council, brick or no brick.
Smart growth = common sense
December 14, 2009 at 9:00 am
I watched that building going up and shoke my head the whole time as it grew to that monster it is. This is another example where we need to look at the gateways into the City, and build smart. Just stand at Stonewall and look up and down the street: granted, the new Catholic Church will add height compared to across the street, but looking toward the City, the left is somewhat “low-lying” till the Jail, and the right had a balanced appearance moving up the line to Harley dealer, the Cemetery, then height progresses.
This complex busted that. I support the intent to have “upscale” housing close to the City & VRE, but this mess looks as bad as City Center over in Manassas Park. Looking at it in terms of the infrastructure already in place at the site, it could be reconfigured and scaled a bit to work with what is already there.
The new developer could even knock out the first monster or scale it down a bit so even if near the road, the buildings could be scaled from road to the other side so they at least blend a little better.
Maybe the new developer should look at the condo complex on the corner of Prince William & Dumfires Roads – those at least blend somewhat.
December 14, 2009 at 9:19 am
I hate to disagree with two of the most active volunteers the City has but I find myself in that unfortunate position…:)
December 14, 2009 at 9:55 am
Common sense now or court case later.
Stand in front of the two banks at Wellington Shopping Center to fully experience another design disaster. It’s on the docket for 2010.
December 14, 2009 at 10:26 am
Court case? Are you suing the City?
December 14, 2009 at 11:33 am
Anyone who invests in city iinfrastructure needs to be able to rely on the city’s decisions. If the city has already allowed a developer to construct buildings at that location (accross from KCs) with only a limited setback, then so be it. The city and the citizens had a full opportunity to disagree and act accordingly. They did not. So if a new/replacement developer is coming in relying on the same or similar setback, I would prefer to not materially change the rules of the game in mid-stream. Yes, I would personally like a better set-back from the street, but I didn’t complain last time and I’m not going to do so now. I want to attract investment and the fastest way to kill that is to flip flop on prior decisions. Predictability = lower risk = more likely investment.
December 14, 2009 at 11:48 am
When you go and read the restrictions…”what restrictions”. It appears they can do just about ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DO…the setbacks are rediculously LOW for housing. But they better make sure they have a tree every 35 feet on a street line!
I truly believe when this “plan” was put into place, they were thinking along the lines of what Center street looks like. i.e businesses on the bottom with “cute” apartments above. This project is ANYTHING but Center street looking.
They might be “able” to build them according to how the city has it “addressed” BUT will they be able to SELL THEM!!!! THAT is the 54K question.
WOW, did someone take a sucker punch on this one!
December 15, 2009 at 8:07 am
Andy, thanks for the update on this–certainly have wondered what the status and forward plan is on this development. Glad to hear brick is replacing vinyl on street facing exterior–as a minimum. With regards to design standards, Manassas CC should keep them high–builders deal with this all the time, and quality is what can keep Old Town competitive.
December 16, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Ground was broken recently on a project by the Wellington Giant. Let’s hope the project gets finished and does not end up like this one or the other one further down on Grant Ave that is on the City/County line.
December 17, 2009 at 6:55 am
Is there a website that shows the City of Manassas boundries? I know the city kind of looks like a jigsaw puzzle piece–always wonder what is city versus county when I see developments. Thanks.
December 18, 2009 at 9:27 am
Brian, any of the map sites will show the boundaries. Google, Bing, Yahoo, Mapquest, they all have. Just plug in 20108 for a location and then back off the zoom until the whole City displays.
From my BlackBerry Storm…