Fairfax proposes change in how Tysons Corner projects affect development cap, Washington Post, June 28, 2011

(COURTESY OF THE GEORGELAS GROUP) - A rendering of the Tysons West Metro station at the intersection of Spring Hill Road and Route 7.

By Kafia A. Hosh

Plans to redevelop Tysons Corner limit total office space in the community to 45 million square feet through 2030, an amount that could be exceeded by companies that have filed plans for new projects.

Now Fairfax County is proposing to only count projects against the cap when they are further down the pipeline, a change developers say could hinder financing.

One year ago, county officials adopted a proposal to redevelop Tysons, its auto-centric jobs district, into a walkable downtown designed around four new Metro stations.

The plan put no limits on new housing in Tysons, a place where 100,000 people work but only 17,000 live. However, it capped office development.

County planners say this limit would allow them to monitor an office building’s impact on traffic.

But the limit also prompted developers to quickly file their projects with the county before the doors close on new office construction. Eight projects have been submitted as rezoning applications that must be approved by the county Board of Supervisors. . . . .

Click here for the rest of this excellent article.

Good article on the state of play at Tysons.  The point is that many of the developers are "rushing to the Court House" to get in their zoning applications to maximize their "by-right" development potential through an irrevocable zoning decision.  Few intend to actually build the amount of office space for which they are applying over the 20-year timeframe of the Tysons plan.

The pushback by the County is an effort to forestall a trigger in the Tysons plan that says the County will raise the limit on office development when the allowable space (45MM GSF) has been "built and approved."  The logic of that phrase (which is logically built backwards) suggests that the buildings would have to be built.  Somehow, however, developers are looking at the phrase as saying "built OR approved" so they can press for a higher development ceiling.  I suspect some court will have to sort that out.