Notes on the Reston Task Force Meeting, September 28, 2010, Marion Stillson

Reston Master Plan Special Task Force, September 28, 2010

Reported by Marion Stillson for RCA’s Reston 2020 Committee

NB This report does not include the Wiehle Avenue presentation, which was posted in its entirety to the County website. It consists of thirteen pages of text and four colored maps.

There were about 20 persons in the audience.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

There was one only, from Dick Rogers, comparing TF Committees’ treatment of open space and parks. Dick’s testimony has been posted to the 2020 Blog.

ADMINISTRATIVE  ITEMS

Patti Nicoson announced that she is circulating the TF’s letter to MWAA.

There was a long discussion of the walk in Arlington the previous Saturday organized by Mark Looney. Joe Stowers had distributed a summary the same day. Judith Pew noted that from Arlington bridge one could see how frequent the bridges across I66 are: every quarter mile. Robert Goudie noted that Ballston has a 6.0 FAR but nevertheless, 25 years later, has one-level, humble stores right across from the station. He also mentioned lots of open space and open lots around Ballston, some planned, some not. Patti Nicoson described a 7-acre park there as being unattractive because it has no design review. Joe Stowers said there were many parallel streets  in the station areas, which were not congested before metrorail and are not congested now. Judith Pew noted that a parking lot for a high school had been built over I66, and was camouflaged.

REVIEW OF SCHEDULE

Heidi Merkel showed her timeline diagram again and said she had been asked who will reconcile the differences between committees in their reports. In response she implied that county staff will. John Carter announced some Vision Committee changes of date, time and meeting place. He invited developers to attend, stating that none have attended at all (later he repeated this invitation).

VISION SUB-COMMITTEE PRESENTATION

John Carter says he wants the committee to fill the ‘gaps’ in roads between the maps of the various other committees. He also wants to reconcile the demographic projections they use, because increases in population at one station imply decreases at other station areas. He wants to start “on the ground” with current facts, check the Master Plan, use the GMU projections (though he remains skeptical of them)and produce 2 or 3 alternatives, including one alternative from each committee.

Mark Looney called for the committees to use a common set of numbers, with staff helping to decide which to use. Jerry Volloy worries about the impact of plans and of offering FARS as incentives; he also asked what assumptions the TF has about funding infrastructure. Heidi Merkel responded to Mark Looney re ‘common set of numbers’: staff has recommended numbers. Someone responded that it may be necessary to provide information to rebut staff’s recommendations. Here Heidi mentioned Terry Maynard’s Town Center committee presentation that morning, describing it as a “broadbrush” approach to FARs. She answered Jerry Volloy’s question on infrastructure by saying the TF’s job is more to list infrastructure needs than to describe how infrastructure might be provided. John Carter agreed, saying you start with the land use, then work backwards from that.

Robert Goudie asked about committee reports: will the TF amend them? Or will the Vision Committee? Heidi answered that it will be the Vision Committee which will spot commonalities and work on the differences. Robert asked if the committee reports will be the basis for staff to work on Comprehensive Plan language. Heidi said “somewhat.” Robert requested a committee scrivener, but Heidi has reservations about this because she hasn’t discussed it yet with Patti. Heidi said the TF will NOT consist of committee reports, cobbled together. John Carter added that he expects all four committees will arrive at both area-wide recommendations and specific recommendations.

Heidi was asked again to explain her diagram on elements of the process. She said it will be iterative, with multiple drafts, and Phase II simultaneous at the start of 2011. She said there will be an extended period of overlap because the transportation analysis is not available. Phase II should take months, not a whole year. She can give no date for advancing to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. All four stations (including Rte. 28) will be bundled together to forward to VDOT at the “Final CP Alternative” stage. VDOT is allowed a certain time for their assessment. She hopes she’ll have a clearer schedule in mind by Thanksgiving.

Paul Thomas asked if the same people will be on the TF for Phase II—what about shop owners. Heidi thought it would be the same personnel. Jerry again asked about implementation and Heidi reminded him there is a twenty-year horizon. Even so, she said the TF would need to prioritize between stations. John Carter asked what the state will do. Heidi said “Check on Fairfax’ analysis,” whereupon Fred Selden (present throughout) took the mike and added: “As they did with Tysons, the state will assess the impact on state roads, and suggest mitigations (which are comments, not requirements).

WIEHLE AVENUE SUB-COMMITTEE PRESENTATION

See county website.

Post-presentation discussion:

Jerry Volloy, referencing one of the Wiehle maps, asked if Kaiser Permanente knows a road is supposed to be built right through their building? Bill Penniman replied that the building is fairly new, and said it is the County’s responsibility to tell them.

Paul Thomas commented that the fractured ownership of condos makes ownership a problem. Bill responded that landowners are starting to talk to one another; they will realize it’s in their own best interests to work together.

Robert Goudie asked if the Wiehle committee will supply an office-residential ratio, and Bill said no, only an end-expectation. Robert prefers requirements, and Andrew Van Horn added that you have to attract residents. Robert insisted that a jobs ratio must be calculated but Bill said it won’t be hard to get residential in this location.

Robert raised the topic of ballparks and stated that ballparks are better placed near the Wiehle station. Pointing out that Boston Properties owns multiple lots in Town Center, he suggested that incentives be swapped from one station to another.  Someone asked if the National Wildlife Federation would give up some parking lot? Another commented that part of Lake Fairfax Park is the last heavily forested area in Reston.

Robert , likening Wiehle to Virginia Square station, said that education, plus residential, would be a good focus for Wiehle. He wants civic functions in Town Center and asked what kind of performance facilities would Wiehle offer. Bill responded, “A beer garden, or small theater. “ Andy described the Town Center’s performance focus as “regional” and Wiehle’s as “local.

Patti lamented that Plaza America and Fannie Mae are not included in any Committee’s work. Robert suggested they be included in Phase II. Bill thinks another grocery store will be needed. Cohann Williams asked if a Children’s Museum is still under consideration? Bill said it would be nice at Wiehle.

Patti, who just visited Shanghai with the Chamber of Commerce, learned how the Chinese provide street crossings for bikes---although bikes are now outnumbered there by cars.