The first document is a set of performance standards
that developers would be expected to achieve in proposals to build around
Reston’s three Metrorail stations. It
outlines three standards levels: a basic
performance level that all developers must meet, an elevated standards level to
reach the higher end of the approved development range, and “bonus” density
beyond the permitted development range for developers who provide exceptional
contributions to the community.
The second document, a statement regarding development intensity
drafted by two land use attorneys on the task force, says that Scenario G—the
development scenario that considers traffic impacts—and maybe even Scenario
E—the 20-year scenario derived from the task force’s station area sub-committee
reports—may not permit enough density to encourage redevelopment around the
station areas. It adds that “even
Scenario E may need additional density ‘carrots’ to provide the desired
amenities and infrastructure.”
This will be the first opportunity for either the full task
force or the Reston public to review these documents in their current form. Task Force Chairman Patty Nicoson told the
writing group that no vote is planned on these documents at this Task Force
meeting, but the task force may vote on them at the next task force meeting.
RCA’s Reston 2020 Committee believes the performance
standards document is headed in the right direction, but needs to be more specific
and comprehensive. In particular, we
question the role of “bonus” density and, if it is part of the report, it
should be extremely explicit and demanding of the development community. The performance standards must also be more
specific and demanding, especially on the issues of schools, parks, and
recreation in the station areas. To
date, the development community has sought to push most of these vital infrastructure
features—if they are developed—beyond the station areas, creating a burden for
the rest of the Reston community both physically and financially. That would be a particularly unsatisfactory
outcome.
On the other hand, the draft statement on intensity of use
is nothing less than an effort by the development community to garner
additional potential development around the Reston Parkway and Wiehle Metro
stations, plain and simple. In fact, the
overall density that would be permitted in the two scenarios is set at about 65
million gross square feet—roughly a doubling of current development in the
study area. The difference is that
Scenario G spreads more of that density to the Herndon-Monroe station area and
shifts the mix of uses toward residential development by about ten
percent.
The changes in the development distribution and mix the
County staff has proposed in Scenario G are expected to markedly reduce the
growth of traffic gridlock in Reston forecast under Scenario E.
Under Scenario E, Reston drivers could expect
evening rush hour delays of three to four minutes at the intersections of
Reston Parkway and Wiehle with Sunset Hills Drive and Sunrise Valley Drive,
according to
the
County’s detailed traffic impact analysis.
We hope that
the County’s traffic
impact analysis will show these rush hour delays can be cut in half at least under
Scenario G.
Another reason for the shift of some density to
Herndon-Monroe is that the County is exploring the potential for public-private
partnerships for mixed-use transit-oriented development of the station area on
its property around its parking garage.
From the County’s perspective, revenues from such development would help
offset the costs experienced in building the Silver Line. It could also reduce Metrorail-related needed
increases in County property taxes.
For the development community, however, it’s simply a matter
of who wins and who loses. Developers
and their attorneys with interests around the Reston Parkway and Wiehle
stations don’t like the possibility of losing potential development
opportunities to the Herndon-Monroe area.
These task force members are
pushing hard to retain the traffic-clogging Scenario E—and even pressing for the
opportunity of higher densities around these stations. Yet, until this draft statement proposed
otherwise, the overall development density proposed in Scenario E had been generally
accepted by the task force’s Reston station area development community.
Developers and their attorneys have repeatedly claimed that
a shift to Scenario G is ‘the (traffic) tail wagging the dog.’
Nonetheless, traffic congestion on Reston’s
main north-south arteries is a serious problem in Reston now, much less in the
future.
Restonians identified it as Reston’s
second-most important community issue (after broader development issues) in
Reston
2020’s recent online community survey.
All Restonians live with congestion on these arteries every day,
especially Reston Parkway and Wiehle Avenue.
Moreover, the planning experience at Tysons accentuates the importance
of traffic impact in Reston planning.
Traffic
impacts were a key driver for restricting office building construction as well
as massively increased bus service and sharp cutbacks in allowable office
parking at Tysons, especially nearest the station, according to a County
official deeply engaged in that process.
Not surprisingly, the analyses at Tysons also indicated that station
area residential construction either has no impact or actually reduces
congestion while office construction drives up congestion.
At the same time the development community is arguing that
they should be permitted to develop the density proposed by Scenario E or more,
they are also arguing that the County’s traffic impact analysis—based on 83% of
the Scenario’s development potential—is based on future market demand that is
way too high for the 2030 horizon. So,
on the one hand, they say they won’t need the development levels laid out in
Scenario E (or even Scenario G) by 2030, but they want the authority to develop
much more than Scenario E proposes. They
have not even tried to reconcile the contradiction in those two positions. Looking longer term, they also choose to
ignore that, whatever the market demand in 2030, Reston and surrounding areas
will continue to grow and, at some point, local traffic on our key north-south
connectors will substantially exceed that tested by the County even with the
addition of new corridor crossings.
The County’s transportation experts are in the midst of
modeling the projected traffic impacts of Scenario G. The results of that effort are expected in
March. To pre-empt results that will
likely demonstrate the traffic impact benefits of Scenario G to their loss, the development community is rushing to have this
draft statement approved by the task force to pre-empt those results. The results will almost certainly undermine any argument
for Scenario E-type development and may even challenge the development
potential under Scenario G. The rush to
judgment in this draft statement is pre-mature and wrongheaded, yet typical of
the way much of the development community has approached the Reston planning
process. They have shown little interest
in integrating new development into the Reston community in a way that
preserves Reston’s quality of life, much less protecting what is so unique
here.
I encourage all Reston residents to attend Tuesday’s task
force meeting to see and hear for themselves what the task force is doing. If you want to be heard, there is an
opportunity at the beginning of each meeting for the public to offer brief
statements to the task force. And, of
course, RCA’s Reston 2020 Committee welcomes your participation in sustaining
and improving Reston’s quality of life through excellence in community
planning.
Terry Maynard
Reston Citizens Association Board of Directors
RCA Representative to the Reston Task Force
Co-Chair, RCA Reston 2020 Committee
