MCC, Park Authority in Showdown Over Lighted Sign in McLean Central Park
MCC Board vs. Kevin Fay
Photos
Pdfs
The McLean Community Center Board held a showdown with the Dranesville Park Authority representative recently over the board's plan to erect a new lighted sign in McLean Central Park.
Kevin Fay, a McLean resident and the Dranesville Park representative, won the showdown. He had told the MCC Board twice already that he had serious concerns about a lighted sign on park property but the board proceeded.
Fay reiterated those concerns at the board's Capital Facilities committee meeting Feb. 14. The Fairfax County Park Authority Board must approve the proposed sign because it's on their land. That won't happen if the local representative opposes it.
Why do McLean taxpayers care? The proposed signs, 10 in all, would cost an estimated $90,000 with the lighted (LED) sign the most expensive.
How did the MCC Board and the Parks representative come to loggerheads over a lighted sign?
As Risa Sanders, the chair of the Capital Facilities committee explained to Fay:
- The existing "trashy sign" at the intersection of Old Dominion Drive and Dolley Madison Boulevard "fell apart" and "we had complaints from the neighbors that the direction signs were not clear," she said.
- ”A lot of us have misgivings about the (current unlighted) sign’’ so board members started redesigning it.
- The "very plodding frustrating process" took three years. " . . one of the things we were all extremely sensitive to here is that we wanted the remodelling of the sign to be appropriate to this community and congruent to the parkland setting it was in."
Fay responded with his concerns:
- “I’m not prepared to commit us to an electronic sign in the middle of the central viewership into the park." Also, this would be the first non-park sign. The park authority usually installs its own signs.
- The Park board is about to develop a new master plan for McLean Central Park and the park entrance could change.
- The sign would carry the names of the Community Center, the McLean Library and the Central Park. Fay said he wanted more balance in the size of the names. Now the Community Center name is in the largest lettering.
Sanders and other board members told him the MCC is paying for the sign.
“It's not a question of whether you’re paying for it but does it open up us for other signs,” he responded. “It's a substantial escalation of the commercial nature of the sign.”
After more back forth, MCC board member Craig Richardson said in apparent frustration, "We could have short circuited this a year ago if we had talked."
Sanders said the board had tried to reach him. Fay: “I’m not hard to find.”
At a November public hearing*, on the proposed signs a majority of the speakers voiced reservations about the LED screen, including Fay, the Friends of McLean Central Park, and a former MCC board member.
LED supporters included the Dolley Madison Library, which is partnering with the community center on the sign, and the Friends of the Community Center.
The board, pushing aside the opposition, approved the signs at its December meeting in the face of a Nov. 30 letter from the Parks Authority.
That letter said they objected to an "electronic billboard in the center of the view shed into the park. We do not have a similar arrangement at any other park and are concerned about the way it will look, how it impacts the perception of "parkland" and about setting precedent at other park sites."
Fay reminded the MCC Board at the recent meeting the question of whether the existing sign stays in the park “is fair game” during for the master planning process. It's on park property and the park authority could remove it, he said.
End result: The two sides agreed to a joint meeting of the two boards at a future date.
*Dranesville Supervisor John Foust, who oversees the MCC Board and appoints the Dranesville Parks representative urged the MCC Board to hold a public hearing on their proposed signs. Foust attended that meeting. He also urged the February meeting between the two.
Joan DuBois
1:35 pm on Wednesday, February 22, 2012
I'm with Kevin Fay on this one -- no lighted sign.
Risa Sanders
4:48 pm on Wednesday, February 22, 2012
The Patch headline does nothing to help advance the process of building cohesivieness in McLean. The MCC Board looks forward to working with the entire FCPA board and are glad they've accepted our invitation to a joint meeting. We are partners on this campus, with MCC providing all programming not only at the MCC, but the park as well. As for the sign, the proposed design was strongly supported by the community in public meetings as well as written comments solicited on our website and in our lobby for nearly a month. We spent a year asking for feedback from Mr. Fay. It is a falsehood to say we proceeded without FCPA approval, as the Exec. Dir. of FCPA, applauded our efforts and approved our design in writing. The LED portion of the sign is smaller than many residential TV screens and the new design improves visibility into the park and provides vastly clearer information and will benefit the entire campus and community. I encourage neighbors to view the designs and all comments on the MCC website (mcleancenter.org). The MCC has followed a thorough course of due diligence working with FCPA, Zoning, the FCPD, the Supervisor, MPA, the Library, the Chanber, the community, etc; Mr. Fay spoke at length about his desire to purchase the lot at the corner of Ingleside from the BOS. Perhaps neighbors will want to know more about what that will mean in terms of a new entrance on Ingleside, programming plans and the impact on the surrounding community. Please try to be more balanced.
M-Squared
8:49 pm on Wednesday, February 22, 2012
I think the "non-scientific" poll above speaks volumes, Risa. I've lived in McLean for 6 years now and do not remember seeing anything regarding this signage. Again, think of the community. This area of McLean is really a livable, walkable community without the overbuilding experienced in othere areas. I look back to my upbringing along Philadelphia's Main Line - where property values are high and stable. This type of commercialization of an area would be shunned. WE should do the same here. If you want balanced - look to the responses of this poll. If you want to understand the validity of these responses, contact me - I've had 30 years of experience gauging consumer reponse. And, this is substantial. NO to the sign!
Risa Sanders
8:53 am on Thursday, February 23, 2012
Mary, you may not realize this but The Patch poll is very misleading because you and I can both sit at home and repeatedly enter our preference. There is no limit to the number of times a respondent can reply. Therefore, this "poll" is indeed quite unscientific and is rendered unmeaningful as valid and reliable data. However, I do appreciate your concerns and thank you for your feedback. I encourage you to visit the Mclean Center website for more information. Many believe the current signage is disgraceful, uninformative, difficult to read and an eyesore to our lovely community. LEDs are not all the same- our portion would be nothing like those you see at schools and it is a modest portion of the overall sign.It would not scroll, light up, use graphics, etc; It is merely a vastly improved way to provide real-time program/event information and in a far more legible manner. In any event, thank you again for your thoughts and please visit the Center often as we have lots of fantastic things happening there for all interests! Best, Risa~
M-Squared
9:01 am on Thursday, February 23, 2012
Understand the poll is unscientific - again, I've got 30 years in the business. It also is not unusual to believe that the public just pushes poll votes thru - yet, time after time studied, this rarely if ever happens to skew polls. That being said, the poll is directional - not to be handily dismissed. I have been to the McLean Center website. I understand LEDs (having worked for Sylvania Lighting for six years...probably know more than any person should!). Which is all why I spoke up on this board - I do know a little something. The question that I have yet to see answered anywhere - clearly and succintly - what is the one overriding main benefit of a lighted sign? A lighted sign can also be seen as garish, disgraceful, and an eyesore (personally, my perspective). so there must be something more to it...what? Draw more traffic to the community center, therefore revenues? If so, the impact of that additional traffic to the community needs to be evaluated. Anyway, that's just the one option I could think of in putting up a lighted sign - to draw more traffic into a location.
Raquel
9:19 am on Thursday, February 23, 2012
The citizens of McLean need to champion a better aesthetic. There is no public purpose served by more visual blight and in fact, may be a threat to public safety. These signs are erected for the purpose of trying to hold the attention of motorists by illuminated messages causing the potential for driver distraction. Remember, this sign will be located at a major McLean intersection. The approval of this LED sign could also set a very undesirable precedent opening the door to commercial requests for bright flashing signs. McLean need not succumb to such cheap commercialization, especially in a park setting. This is not Las Vegas or Times Square.
Risa Sanders
9:57 am on Thursday, February 23, 2012
The police department was consulted last year on this issue as we wanted to address this question as well. The feedback we received was that it would actually be less distracting because of the improved legibility and, once again, we are not using graphics or other elements that would be a distraction. We have been very open throughout this design process and have endeavored to solicit input from all segments of the community for well over a year. Thanks all, and if you have other questions or concerns about any aspect of the MCC, please feel free to direct them to me at the MCC board or please attend one of our meetings which are all open to the public and include an opportunity for citizen comment. Thank you~
Raquel
10:57 am on Thursday, February 23, 2012
The Fairfax County Police Department does not conduct traffic safety studies. That is the role of federal, state and local governments as well as universities and insurance institutes. In this particular case, Fairfax County and VDOT should have been the ones consulted on the potential safety hazard to drivers. The $90,000 in McLean taxpayer money is better spent elsewhere. It would be more prudent and fiscally responsible to refurbish the existing sign to its original condition.
M-Squared
12:03 pm on Thursday, February 23, 2012
The $90k for the project is really popping out for me - I've been in marketing longer than I care to admit and have done my share of retail signage projects - and $90k is steep for a sign. I can only assume that underground wiring and infrastructure will have to be laid for a lighted LED sign on the proposed site. Surely, this seems like a lot of drama for a LED Community Center sign. Agreed, the $90k could be spent on something more beneficial to the community at large - perhaps some sort of communitys services project? I think at this point given how long this project has been in committee - that it's become more of a point of 'honor' than relevance.
Risa Sanders
9:28 am on Friday, February 24, 2012
I can understand your confusion as the Patch has consistently neglected to mention that 90k is the estimated cost for renovation of 10 (yes, 10) signs. It is not only for the main signage in the park that also helps promote the Park Authority and our beautiful new Library, but also to improve the signage (especially the directional arrows ,and to add MPA and the Alden) at the corner of Ingleside and #123, as well as to the signage on Ingleside at the entrance to the MCC, the signage on the street between the Library and the MCC, and the 6 smaller signs that run along the #123 portion of the park. People may not realize that the MCC provides, maintains and pays for all of that. The sign project has been out of committee for over a year and was approved by the park authority a year ago. The goal is to have a beautiful and elegant integrated signage system among the 10 signs that provides clearer and enhanced information, while maintaining a parkland aesthetic. The only "drama" involved are the unfortunate headlines the Patch has chosen to utilize. Good people are working hard to collaborate and make progress. We are glad for all resident's engagement and encourage folks to attend our meetings or email us directly. That's the best way to get thorough and factual answers to all of your questions. Thank you~
Dorothy Hassan
11:58 am on Sunday, February 26, 2012
Many people get lost trying to find their way to the community center. At least more people have actually heard of it these days! I think a well lit sign would be beneficial. We are not talking about a flashing neon sign, but something tasteful and legible from a car. I think Mr. Fay may be dissembling somewhat.
My concern is that the existing sign is relatively new. It shouldn't be crumbling, so why is it? And one should be able to better illuminate it.