Message
from the Chairman
Before
I begin what will be a long message this month, I would like
to wish everyone a happy and joyous holiday season. I hope
the celebration of your holidays brings you happiness and
lots of good cheer. As always, if you are traveling, go safely.
I have a number of items to discuss
this month but before I get into the meat of the matters,
a couple of minor items for you.
SCA DUES DUE
Our SCA Treasurer, Bernie Tabarini, sent out SCA Dues invoices
last month. If you receive my emails, you should have
received your invoice by email from Bernie. The dues
this year are again $20. The invoice directs you to
send the payment to Bernie at his house. His address
is 3802 Cobblestone Court. You can also drop your payment
off in his carport in the box he has set up.
FYI, the SCA year runs from September 1 through August 30.
Thus, if you thought you paid last year this time, you probably
did and it would have been for the 2005 - 2006 year.
The invoices sent this week are for 2006 - 2007.
WILSON BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
Stoneybrooke resident Mary Sobray sent along the link for
the Wilson Bridge project. I get a couple emails a week
detailing street closings around the construction however,
instead of sending those along every couple days, I'll give
you the link where you can check in on the work, progress,
and most importantly, closings, at your convenience: http://www.wilsonbridge.com/cms/cms-conditions-lc.htm#va
Now, on to other matters.
Before I get into the discussion regarding
the issues, I want you to understand that under no circumstances
is the SCA Board attempting to exert control over our neighborhood.
When issues reach a critical mass (i.e.: lots of complaints
or questioning “why”), I and the Board will examine
options for fixing the issue. That is what we were elected
to do. My interest, and the Board’s interest is and
always has been to protect our neighborhood and, where and
when we can, improve our quality of life and thus, our property
values.
Now on to the issues.
As many of you saw in the notes distributed
through email, the SCA Board met to discuss a few issues affecting
Stoneybrooke. The issues, in no particular order are:
- Trash Collection
- Parking of boats, RVs, and trailers
- Traffic Calming
- Resurrecting the Stoneybrooke Architectural
Control Committee
Each of these issues is discussed
below.
TRASH COLLECTION
I still receive calls from residents tired of seeing trash
cans out 5 days a week and wondering why we cannot have county
pick up. The trash cans are not out because residents don’t
move them back; they are out due to three different trash
haulers picking up in Stoneybrooke. I explain the process
for creating a “sanitary district” which would
switch us from private haulers to county pick up. Most of
them respond that they would support such a change.
The SCA Board has agreed to put this
matter to a vote of Stoneybrooke SCA members. AT THE SCA MEETING
ON JANUARY 18, WITH A “WEATHER DATE” OF JANUARY
25, THE SCA MEMBERSHIP WILL VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO BEGIN
THE PROCESS TO CREATE A SANITARY DISTRICT IN STONEYBROOKE.
This vote is STRICTLY on whether or
not to BEGIN the process. The
process involves a petition submitted to the County Board
of Supervisors, asking them to vote in favor of the creation
of a sanitary district. The petition must include the signatures
of 60% of HOMEOWNERS in the neighborhood, or “district.”
Thus, as there are 229 homes in Stoneybrooke (this does not
include upper and lower (Cool Brooke Way) Woodstone), we must
have 138 homeowners sign the petition.
If the VOTE at the SCA meeting on
January 18 does not pass, we will NOT BEGIN the process, and
we will RETAIN our system of multiple private trash haulers.
If the vote passes and the requisite
number of signatures are gathered, the County Board of Supervisors
will then hold hearings to consider the petition. As with
any public hearing process, anyone affected by the petition
can testify-- for or against. Thus, homeowners, residents
and certainly, private trash haulers can testify. The creation
of a sanitary district and with it the change to county pick
up, is entirely up to the Board of Supervisors.
The exact plan for discussion, debate,
and the vote at the January 18 SCA meeting is being worked
out and will be announced in the January Sentinel.
If the vote at the January SCA meeting
passes, WE WILL NEED SOMEONE IN THE COMMUNITY TO COORDINATE
THE PETITION DRIVE. If you are interested in heading this
up, please contact me. IF NO ONE STEPS UP TO TAKE THIS ON,
THE PETITION WILL FAIL AND WE WILL RETAIN OUR CURRENT SYSTEM.
Regarding actual trash pick up, here
are the highlights of the county system and how it works:
- Creating the district will eliminate
private haulers from collecting in Stoneybrooke. If approved
in January, and the requisite number of signatures is gathered,
and the petition is submitted, the private haulers WILL
testify against us at the county hearings. I have been assured
by Dana Kauffman’s office however that if this is
what we want, he will work for us to get it. Remember: there
are no guarantees, as the ENTIRE County Board of Supervisors
votes on this issue.
- Trash collection would be once-a-week.
- Recyclables would also be once-a-week.
I don’t know if trash and recycling would be on separate
days.
- Each resident is allowed 5 “special”
pickups of big items (appliances, furniture) per year. The
special pickups can be up to 12 cubic yards, which is roughly
the size of a minivan. There is no extra charge for these
additional pickups. Special pick ups beyond the five allotted
would be charged at $60 per pick up of 12 cubic yards.
- The 2007 fee for county trash removal
will be $315. That is a little lower than Virginia Trash’s
rate. The fee is included in the semi-annual property tax
bill. Some homeowners would pay that out of their mortgage
escrow.
For more information on county pick
up, you can visit their website: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpwes/trash/coll_main.htm
PARKING OF BOATS, RVS, AND TRAILERS
Unfortunately, several residents are using our streets for
permanent storage of their boats, RVs, and trailers. While
county code currently allows this, recent changes in state
law have given Virginia counties the ability to create “parking
districts” that would ban these types of vehicles from
residential streets. at the November meeting, the SCA Board
voted to put the creation of a parking district to a vote
of SCA membership.
Please note that in the Board meeting
notes that were accidentally forwarded to the community, I
said that the creation of a parking district would ban these
types of vehicles from private property. THIS IS NOT TRUE.
This was a mistake on my part. The creation of a parking district
would ban these types of vehicles from street parking only.
Like the trash collection vote, the
vote regarding a parking district will strictly be to BEGIN
the process. The process is identical to that for creating
a sanitary district. We would begin a petition requiring 60%
of HOMEOWNERS to sign, which is then forwarded to the County
Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors will hold hearings
and vote. Once the district is created, banned vehicles can
then be ticketed by police.
If the vote at the January SCA meeting
passes, WE WILL NEED SOMEONE IN THE COMMUNITY TO COORDINATE
THE PETITION DRIVE. If you are interested in heading this
up, please contact me. IF NOONE STEPS UP TO TAKE THIS ON,
THE PETITION WILL FAIL AND WE WILL RETAIN OUR CURRENT SYSTEM.
TRAFFIC CALMING
Complaints from residents regarding vehicles speeding in the
neighborhood continue at a regular clip. With the addition
of traffic calming measures in Virginia Hills on Dorsett Drive,
I’ve been asked if that is possible in Stoneybrooke.
This issue will be referred to as
PERMANENT traffic calming. At the SCA Board meeting, the Board
voted AGAINST asking the Virginia Department of Transportation
for PERMANENT traffic calming measures. The reasons are as
follows:
- Traffic calming is the domain of
VDOT, not the county. VDOT would conduct studies to determine
if we have enough traffic volume to necessitate calming
measures. Although I do not know the parameters, I feel
confident in stating that I do not believe we’ll have
enough volume. Stoneybrooke Lane is not Dorsett Drive or
Memorial Lane.
- Traffic calming measures (devices)
have to be planted in front of someone’s home. Thus,
that homeowner would lose the ability to park in front of
their house. As most homes in Stoneybrooke have only a single
car driveway and garage or carport (if that), the ability
to park on the street is important. On this point alone
I oppose the installation of calming measures.
- Traffic calming causes vehicles
to slow down, then speed up, causing more noise--especially
from large trucks.
- Traffic calming slows down emergency
response equipment.
The second part of this issue is ALTERNATIVE
traffic calming. On this issue, the SCA Board voted in FAVOR
of contacting VDOT to discuss other measures that might be
available to get us to slow down.
Rest assured that in conversations
with VDOT, we will completely understand what is involved
with alternative measures before we pursue them. And most
certainly, you will be informed along the way. For example,
if studies are conducted and our neighborhood qualifies, is
VDOT then MANDATED to install the measures, whether we like
them or not? What other choices might we have?
One thing is for sure. We can ALL
make a choice to SLOW DOWN. When you’re turning into
Stoneybrooke for home, you’re less than a minute away
regardless of which house you live in or how fast you barrel
down the street to get there. On the flip side, if you’re
leaving Stoneybrooke, you’re going to get hosed at our
exit intersection anyway. So what’s the big hurry?
One other note on this. Remember,
if you are going at an excessive rate of speed up the street,
there are residents toward the top of the hill who, because
of the turn in the road, CANNOT SEE YOU COMING WHEN THEY PULL
OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY.
Architectural Control Committee
Due to some problems over the last few years with illegal
construction, overcrowding, and other county code violations,
the SCA Board voted to RESURRECT the Stoneybrooke Architectural
Control Committee. A little history for you:
In the old days, if you read the Stoneybrooke
covenants, residents were required to submit plans for any
additions they wanted to make to their properties. In fact,
I feel pretty certain that we were the last residents to follow
this rule when we built our shed in our back yard. Through
the years however, this has fallen by the wayside. Today,
we simply ask residents to follow county code and notify your
neighbors if you’re planning a project.
Unfortunately, we have residents who
don’t want to follow along. Thus, the board voted to
resurrect this committee. We are in the process of approaching
some members of our community about this issue to get their
feedback on their interest in serving in this capacity.
Unlike a homeowners association where
you are required to get approval for projects before commencing,
our committee will not do that. Our by-laws and covenants
do not give us this authority. The vision for this committee
is to assist residents with questions regarding county requirements
and process. Or, in the absence of a resident’s cooperation,
be the conduit for filing complaints and following up.
Like our Neighborhood Watch committee,
I envision a committee that will work together to create a
resource that benefits Stoneybrooke. Navigating the resources
required to gain approvals from the county for projects can
be confusing. In addition, understanding county rules for
how we can use our properties and options for enforcing county
code is a service this committee can provide. The idea is
to help, not to hinder, and to communicate and be the conduit
for enforcing county code.
That’s all for now, folks.
Happy Holidays!
Mike
|
.jpg)
