Mount Vernon — Supervisor Dan Storck (D-Mount Vernon) has asked to again postpone Board of Supervisors action on development for the Bock, or Hinson, Farm property in Mount Vernon.
Storck’s office said his motion at the Feb. 14 supervisors meeting was a “referral back” to the Planning Commission to allow the applicant, developer Joe Francone, to bring forward an updated proposal.
“Given the needed changes to the development plan,” Storck’s motion read, “these changes will require a new public hearing before the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. This action will not require the applicant to re-start the process but will require them to continue to work with staff and community on refinements to their concepts.”
One initial proposal that passed the Planning Commission and has already come before the supervisors was for a senior (55+) community with four, four-story buildings with 128 units at 55 ft in height, including underground structured parking.
However Storck said that he doesn’t support that option.
At a community meeting last month, Francone introduced two other options that addressed some community members’ concerns over the height of the first option.
Those secondary options included: B, a senior community proposal, but with lower building height (50 feet) and approximately five to 10 fewer units; and C, a proposal of 35-40 units of townhomes that aren’t age-restricted and would be around 35 feet in height, not including the peaks of the roofs.
Storck said he thinks the second and third options both make more sense than the first, however at this point, the applicant may come back with an entirely new option.
“The bottom line is it was deferred,” Storck said in an interview. Which he said was the only way for the applicant to move forward in a way that could go “cheaper, faster and with something that makes more sense.”
Results of an online community survey on the Bock property options, conducted by Storck’s office, are available here: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/mountvernon/documents/bock_farm_survey_results.pdf