Reston Spring

Reston Spring
Reston Spring

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

RTF Herndon-Monroe Committee Meeting Summary, July 26, 2010, John Lovaas

It looked like this morning's meeting was going to be a nonstarter. By 8:10 only two TF members and a couple of us community types were present. But, a few more straggled in and a meeting was held.

Nick Bauer and co-chair Greg Riegle noted that they had sent around a draft report to Subcommittee members, but that only one person had responded. They couldn't decide if it were the summer heat, vacation season or a dull report that accounted for the non-response. At Greg's suggestion, they decided to release the draft for the wider community to look at--County rep said it would be posted on county site for all to see by the end of today.

Discussion that followed was more general, bounced around from issue to issue.
Greg Riegle suggested that as next draft is written--by he and Nick starting this week, in time for next meeting, they should not get into recommending FARs (floor area ratio), a measure he found not the most useful. He asked County DPZ rep Sandi Smith how DPZ felt about getting away from FARs. She seemed to agree partially, asking if maybe FAR ranges might be an alternative.

Fred Costello noted that the existing comprehensive plan, in fact, specifies FARs by land unit. It was also noted that the Town Center group is using FARs by land unit, and using them as a basis for considering developer incentives for residential building, e.g. Greg said he wondered if sticking with the spirit of plan goals, while specifying building heights, setbacks (not open space....) mightn't be more meaningful. Polo Fields rep expressed preference for great specificity. No formal conclusion that I heard on this. Guess we'll know when we see next draft.

Brian Moll, who represented JBG developer, returned to subject of access to huge parking structures near station. Said he, of course, did not favor access from middle of Sunrise Valley stretch fronting Polo Fields, but since options were limited to Sprint site area on east and pedestrian path on west (from Monroe Street), maybe it was time to re-open the question of the "wetlands" which are not really wetlands, but an old proffer. Surely, this "wetland" could be re-located elsewhere. The Chair corrected him--it is a wetland area--and others around the table did not want to re-open this question resolved much earlier in favor of protecting the Sunrise Valley Wetlands Park. He thought this matter needed further study.

The Chair indicated that the report would likely discuss possible station southside access and connectivity alternatives without designating a preference.

There was some discussion of the question of balance of residential to commercial development given the desire to limit the growing traffic congestion to the extent possible.

Brian Moll argued against including requirements for certain ratios of residential to commercial construction given the fact that at times the market is not in need of new residential, so commercial makes sense in spite of plan ratios. Counter argument was noted that perhaps rather than making no plan requirement to move toward balance, it would be better in fact not to proceed to build excessive commercial (as happened in RTC which now has 10 to 15 to one commercial over residential ratio, when 1:1 would approximate optimal), in the short term i.e. until residential market improved rather making eliminating potential for future balance by filling available with commercial.

There was brief discussion of the community meeting in Herndon last week kicking off their study of future for the north side of H-M station. VHB (which is assisting the Town of Herndon) consulting firm apparently had some success seeking community opinions as to initial preference for future development. Nick noted that the anticipated large numbers in favor of no additional development in station area did not materialize. Most seemed to want to talk about possibilities that would make sense for the community with the new station. Arthur Hill argued that in fact, the subcommittee should not make a lot of recommendations for major change on the southside H-M area, because he did not believe that much would happen until the future plans for the Herndon, northside became apparent.

To see work on the Herndon study, go to www.vhb.com/HerndonMETRORAIL/

NEXT: Co-chairs working on a revised draft set of sub-committee recommendations to the Task Force, and distribution of existing draft to interested outsiders would begin. Next meeting, Monday, August 9, at RCC/HW.

JLovaas

No comments:

Post a Comment

Your comments are welcome and encouraged as long as they are relevant, constructive, and decent.