A dispute over obstructed views from multimillion-dollar condos in Rosslyn has left some officials up in arms and homeowners threatening a lawsuit.
County-government staff last month received multiple tongue-lashings from members of the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) over their handling of a 2023 zoning matter at The Waterview condo building in Rosslyn.
However, BZA members ultimately determined they had no authority to give aggrieved residents at the Waterview condominium more than words of sympathy for their plight.
As a result, homeowners are considering heading to court over world-class views now partially blocked by rooftop telecommunications equipment.
‘We Were Completely Blindsided’
Theodore and Georgene Boll purchased a 25th-floor condominium unit in the 31-story Waterview building at 1111 19th Street N. for $2.625 million in early 2023.
From the perch, they were able to enjoy glorious views of the national monuments and Potomac River.
But since December 2023, a large telecommunications-equipment box atop the adjacent Potomac Tower office building at 1001 19th Street N. has obscured those vistas.
“We were completely blindsided by these installations. We received no advance notice whatsoever,” Theodore Boll said at the Feb.19 BZA meeting. “Dealing with the county has been arduous and slow.”
The Bolls, and others in the building whose views have been compromised, have the backing of Waterview’s condominium board in the dispute with the county government.
“It’s our home, and we feel we have been compromised — and it doesn’t feel very good,” said Jim Matthews, president of that body.
Their complaint was not entirely with the telecommunications box itself. It was with limits to public outreach and the fact that, they allege, the County Board’s action allowed the equipment to rise nearly nine feet higher than allowed in the county’s zoning code.
“It was illegal from the beginning,” said Gifford Hampshire, a land-use attorney representing the Bolls. “A county cannot violate its own ordinance.”
That was not the view of the county government’s zoning administrator, Arlova Vonhm, or her legal counsel.
At the BZA meeting, they argued that the county’s site-plan amendment for the site in June 2023 trumped other portions of the zoning code. As a result, county staff contend, the 31.9-foot-tall equipment is legal even though the zoning code’s limit is 23 feet.
BZA Sides with Staff on Technical Grounds
County officials argued that BZA members had no jurisdiction to compel the zoning administrator to rule on whether the telecommunications equipment, used by Verizon and AT&T, was legal.
BZA members ultimately concluded they had no jurisdiction to rule on the matter, handing a win to the county government. But before reaching that point, several BZA members expressed frustration over how county officials handled the matter.
The whole issue “looks like a serious failure of the public process,” said BZA member Inta Malis, telling the Bolls she was “sorry for what has happened.”
“Things were not handled well,” added BZA member Carol McCoskrie. “We don’t have the ability, unfortunately, to correct that process.”
Residents of Waterview say they were not provided notice of the June 2023 public hearing, which like most county-government advertising was placed in the Washington Times.
“To think we’re going to read the Washington Times? Are you kidding me?” Matthews said.
Joseph Ventrone, president of the North Rosslyn Civic Association, alleged that the county’s lack of transparency represented “serious misjudgment” and “a disregard for the concerns of the community.”
“The neighbors were deprived of the opportunity to voice their views,” Ventrone told BZA members.
Was Outreach Sufficient?
Under state law, anyone wishing to challenge the June 2023 County Board action had 30 days after it occurred to file their objections with the Circuit Court.
That window of opportunity came and went, however, without many Waterview residents knowing about the Board’s action.
“It really makes us suspect,” Matthews said. “The issue is bigger than cell towers. It really is about justice and fairness.”
An attorney representing zoning officials acknowledged that only the “bare minimum” required under state law was done to communicate the matter with the public.
Hampshire, representing the Bolls, contends that limited outreach was a major failing of the planning process.
“How was somebody supposed to know to appeal to Circuit Court in 30 days if they have no notice?” he asked. “This has all the indications of being designed so that members of the public wouldn’t know about it and wouldn’t raise a stink about it.”
BZA members seemed to be on his side.
“The process failed. It’s very disturbing that something like this could happen,” member Judy Freshman said. “I’m troubled by the fact I can’t see where the remedy is for the people who have been damaged.”
Three of five current County Board members were elected to office after the 2023 zoning action was taken. Freshman suggested it might be best for County Board members to revisit the issue.
County Board Declines to Comment
Speaking on behalf of the Arlington County Board, spokesperson David Barrera cited a policy against Board members commenting on BZA matters when contacted with questions.
A county staff report for the June 2023 meeting noted that placards were placed in various locations surrounding the subject property, and that the North Rosslyn Civic Association and Rosslyn Business Improvement District (BID) were contacted about the proposal.
The BID expressed its support of the proposal in advance of the meeting, while the North Rosslyn Civic Association did not respond, the staff report said.
Barrera’s response did not address one of the key demands of the North Rosslyn Civic Association made last month — that Board members investigate the situation to determine what went wrong, and what could be done better in the future.
At the BZA meeting, Malis said she did not blame County Board members for approving the site-plan amendment, given the information and feedback they had in front of them at the time of the 2023 vote.
But, Malis said, a final decision might have been different if the body had all the facts in front of it.
Next Stop May Be a Courtroom
The telecommunications equipment placed atop Potomac Tower is designed to replace equipment that previously had stood atop the nearby RCA Building.
That 1950s-era office building was demolished in 2023 to make way for construction of a new residential building.
Despite the 30-day period for appealing the matter to court having long since expired, the Bolls and potentially other residents may move forward with a legal challenge to rulings by the zoning administrator and BZA, one source told ARLnow.
The BZA’s Malis intimated that might be the only course left to them.
“I don’t know how we can make [the situation] right or the county can,” she said.
Hampshire provided an inkling of what might be at stake if the matter heads to court.
Noting that the other building is just 20 feet away from the kitchen and dining-room windows of his clients, he suggested the now-obscured views might cost homeowners “$1 million” in terms of resale prices of the affected properties.
