RE-SCHEDULED!--Agenda: Reston 2020 Meeting, February 3, 2011

UPDATE 2:  The Reston 2020 meeting has been re-scheduled for February 3, 2011.  

UPDATE:  Tonight's meeting of the Reston 2020 Committee has been postponed until next week due to poor road conditions.  We will update this post with the details of time and place.  Thank you all for your patience.  Terry Maynard, Co-Chair, Reston 2020 Committee.

Agenda

Reston 2020 Committee Meeting

7:30PM-9:30PM, February 3, 2011

Reston Community Center—Lake Anne

1.  Implementing the Comprehensive Plan (Dick Stillson—20 minutes)

Other than one briefing from a County staffer, the RTF has not begun to address the numerous implementation issues that go with creating a new Comprehensive Plan for Reston, especially financing and transportation. 

Action:  Reston 2020 seeks to create an Implementation Working Group to address the topic.  It will ultimately provide a report that discusses the issue and provides recommendations for Reston 2020 to endorse and forward to the Task Force.

For further background, see the following items:

·         Funding Reston’s Infrastructure Improvements, Fairfax County presentation

·         “Planning Without Implementation Is Empty,” Reston 2020 Working Group Report

2.  The RTF Steering Committee (Terry Maynard—20 minutes)

The RTF has created a steering committee (SC) that is supposed to coordinate the vision and several TOD area reports and format them in Comprehensive Plan language.  The SC has been extremely aggressive so far in editing the Vision Committee’s report in ways that may not suit Restonians’ interests.  It is not clear that the SC was given this mandate by the RTF.

Action:  Reston 2020 needs to decide how to respond to the work of the SC to help ensure that the resulting draft Plan properly reflects the needs of Restonians.

For further background, see the following items on the Reston 2020 blog:

·         RTF Vision Committee Report and Massive Edits by RTF Steering Committee

·         Notes from the RTF Steering Committee Meeting, January 11, 2011

·         Notes from the RTF Steering Committee Meeting, January 4, 2011

·         Notes from the RTF Steering Committee Meeting, December 20, 2011

3.  Town of Herndon Planning for Herndon-Monroe Station Area (Paul Damory—20 minutes)

The Town of Herndon is planning to develop a large area office complex north of the Herndon-Monroe station, shifting much of the burden for supporting that complex to the Reston side of the Dulles Corridor and ignoring basic principles for transit-oriented development. 

Action:  R2020 seeks to create a Working Group to address the this emerging situation and propose actions for Reston 2020 in dealing with Herndon and the RTF. 

For further background, see the following items on the Reston 2020 blog:

·         Report on Nov. 17, 2010, Herndon community meeting on Herndon-Monroe planning

·         Report on Jan. 21, 2010, Herndon business community meeting on H-M planning

4.  Reston 2020 Planning and Work for RTF’s Phase II—Village Centers & Residential Areas (Tammi Petrine—20 minutes)

Reston 2020 is beginning the process for planning for Phase II of the RTF effort although the RTF has taken little action so far.   An update on current and planned activities.

Action:  What more should Reston 2020 be doing at this time?

Background:  Hudgins Agrees to Re-constituted RTF for Phase II

5.  Fairway Apartments Redux (Tammi Petrine—10 minutes)

Preliminary information indicates JBG will be presenting a new proposal for re-developing Fairway Apartments at next month’s Reston P&Z meeting.  You may recall that JBG’s last proposal was all but rejected outright by the County planning staff as out of character for the neighborhood. 

Action:  This is an information discussion. 

Background:  DPZ Blasts JBG Fairway Apartments Redevelopment Plan

               

Notes on the Town of Herndon Meeting with Developers on Herndon-Monroe, January 21, 2011, John Lovaas

This morning's meeting of the Herndon Town planning group focused on redevelopment of the Herndon area abutting the Dulles Toll Road, with the Reston West (formerly Herndon-Monroe) station area at the center.  The meeting was set up as a dialogue of Herndon planning staff and redevelopment study consultants with property owners and mostly (or all?) commercial developers and property owners.

Observers, including Herndon Mayor and Town Council members and press were sent to the back of the room--no kidding. There were no observers from the Herndon-Monroe Committee of the Reston Task Force, but there was one developer named Mike ____ who has been frequent participant in H-M meetings.  (Mike participated actively, seemed to have a land interest near the station on the Herndon side and clearly that's where his heart was.)  Patty Nicoson sat in the way back and, like other observers, did not speak. 

 The discussion focused on:

    Summary of preliminary plan----basically two alternatives: Plan 1 calling for F.A.R.s of 2.5 in the main TOD area (rectangle in shape radiating around 1/4 mile out station area, continuing at slightly less beyond that (no number below 2.5 was specified); and,

Plan 2 calling for F.A.R. of 4.5 in TOD core, 2.5-3 in transition area beyond it.

Staff said they were thinking of building heights up to 15 stories--in addition to garage levels--nearest the station entrance area.  Beyond the transition area, there is to be a buffer area with 0.7 F.A.R., buildings not in excess of 4 stories, preference for residential abutting existing single family residential areas north and NW or TOD core.

Staff announced that public comment period on the preliminary plan had been extended to January 28th (from original mid-December date).

    Major Transportation Issues (as defined by Town transportation planner Chris___)--Two main "portals" to the study area are "already congested intersections" at Herndon Pkwy/Spring Street/Fairfax County Pkwy on NE of study area and Herndon Pkwy/Van Buren on NW of study area.  Formidable problems, esp on NE, unlikely to be resolved at above a failed level of service without additional portals on north side---or, the unthinkable, redevelopment intensity at less than 4.5--in order to restrain overall volume in absence of additional access points to study area.

   -One developer suggested that (since lower F.A.R.s not doable!) solution he would opt for  coming from east of Herndon would be to take Fairfax County Parkway to Sunrise Valley, drive west to Monroe and over the bridge to enter Herndon study area from the west!

[It would be OK if more traffic goes thru Reston side--this was only the beginning of this theme!].

    F.A.R.s, density alternatives and adequacy of incentive for landowners to redevelop:

Jim ___ of Lerner led the charge.  2.5 was a joke, certainly insufficient.  4.5 was closer to what was needed, but would be "bare minimum" esp. for parcels in the TOD central area.  One developer said, in fact, some sites might not be able to achieve quite the 4.5, but 2.5 clearly inadequate.  

    Staffer (Kay ___) leading the meeting asked developers what they thought about F.A.R.s in terms of being sufficient incentive for them to redevelop.  Imagine the responses....which came, as did nearly all comments during the 2 and 1/2 hours I was present, from 7 developers, or about 1/3 of those sitting in seats reserved for developers.  Jim ___ of Lerner led the charge.  2.5 was a joke, certainly insufficient.  4.5 was closer to what was needed, but would be "bare minimum" esp. for parcels in the TOD central area.  One developer said, in fact, some sites might not be able to achieve quite the 4.5, but 2.5 clearly inadequate. 

    Access to the station and what area should look like-  While nothing other than a possible plaza is shown near the entrance to station area on north (Herndon) side of the DTR, Staffer Kay noted that the existing town comp plan in fact allows for a "Kiss and Ride" at the entrance.  She said that negotiations are ongoing with WMATA for [unspecified] improvements.  WMATA designs and is responsible for station operations, the staff is currently thinking of a kiss and ride for cars to drop off passengers for rail and a "bus pull-over area".   She allowed that while there were some who wanted Herndon to provide absolutely nothing to facilitate station access, she thought they were in a minority.  Some might like an area to park, but that was definitely not going to happen, but there seemed to be good support for a kiss and ride, she said.

This caused the uproar of the morning--largely among the same 6 or 7, with property nearest station. Mike _____, who is active in Herndon-Monroe Committee of Reston Task Force, kicked it off. He said Kiss and Rides become "bus staging areas, a bus depot".  "I'm alarmed!"  This will change our area for the worse. Kay assured the now upset developer band that the kiss and ride will only be for buses to stop and pick up, let off passengers. She said, " any feeder buses will go to the south side." [via Sunrise Valley Drive].  The Lerner rep and a couple of other developers chimed in:  "You said 'accomodate' buses, not 'encourage'.  That is very different." In a back and forth with Mike and a couple of others, acceptable Kiss and Ride bus activity was defined as buses which come no more often that like every 10-15 minutes and DO NOT WAIT.

Then, one fellow in developer area piped up that there were tradeoffs here--noting that given earlier references to failing intersections and TOD objectives of reducing number of cars, weren't buses something to be encouraged!?  The only voice from the staff/planning side was a muted comment in support from one of the consultants. Jim of Lerner responded, "they've got a big multi-modal transportation facility on the south side, let them use that." Kay tried to calm the angry little group, reminding them that the town will commission a complete transportation study as in fact required by the Commonwealth (528?) to look at all transportation-related questions.

There was a brief discussion of Kay's earlier reference to Herndon's use of "form-based planning" vs. planning based on preferred uses.  Developers seemed mystified by it.  Here we had some common ground!

A break was announced (after 2 and 1/2 hours!).  After hearing that the staff was going to give the group one more opportunity to comment on the overall plan after the break, I decided I had heard all I needed to hear.  I noticed that the Mayor and at least a few of the developers seemed to be leaving as well.

On the way out, I chatted very briefly with Mayor Steve DeBenedittis, asked him how he felt about the last part of the discussion--on facilitating access to the station.  He said something like, "With all the capacity they are going to have on the south side, I don't think we need much if anything on this side."  For me, this was some worrisome stuff. 

I wish that there had been representation from the RTF  Herndon-Monroe Committee.  In my view, there should be continuing contact by those directly interested on the Reston side--that means the H-M Committee, others if they continue to show no interest. 

I was glad to see Richard Lambert from Fairfax County DPZ in attendance, although I did not get a chance to talk with him.

"Bleak outlook forecast for 2nd phase of Silver Line," Fairfax Times, January 19, 2011

County auditors say current toll structure won't cover cost for planned rail expansion

by Kali Schumitz | Staff Writer

Projected toll rates for the Dulles Toll Road that were used to back bonds might not present the full picture, according to Fairfax County auditors.

In April 2010, the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority commissioned a tolling study that projected toll rate increases that would be needed to support the $1.3 billion in bonds the airports authority issued in 2009 and 2010. The study also projected the amount of decreased traffic that would result from the tolling increases.

The toll-backed bonds are a primary funding source for the Dulles Metrorail extension, now under construction.

However, that study does not depict any decrease in the number of toll road users after the first segment of the new Silver Line opens at the end of 2013, according to a draft report from the county's Office of Financial and Program Audit. Fewer users could decrease the revenue projections. . . .

Please read the rest of this story here.  

RTF Vision Committee Report and Massive Edits by RTF Steering Committee

Embedded below is the final report of the Reston Task Force (RTF) Vision Committee, a committee comprising Restonians and other stakeholders in Reston.  It is a visionary statement about what Reston values and what Reston is and intends to become. 

Reston Task Force Vision Committee Report

Despite the months of effort put into  this report, the Steering Committee of the RTF--which has created its own mandate without RTF oversight--is in the process of gutting it of some of its most important features, either deleting or seriously weakening important language in the report.  You can see the scope of the proposed changes in the edited report below:

Reston Vision Principless with Chairman and DPZ Edits

The Reston 2020 Committee will have more to say on this later.

RCA Honors 'Pillar of Community': Dave Edwards, by Carolyn Lawson Low, Reston Patch, January 14, 2011

Edwards is a part of Reston's growth and unique culture.

The Reston Citizen’s Association, a long-standing civic association committed to protecting and promoting Reston’s founding principles, honored one of the “pillars of the Reston community” on Thursday night.

RCA’s 2010 Community Service "Citizen of the Year" Award was presented to Dave Edwards for his impressive role in shaping and nurturing the growth of Reston, from the early years through today.

The crowded room at the Reston Community Center gathered for the opportunity to congratulate Edwards. . . .

For the rest of this article, please click here.

UPDATE:  Here is the biographical statement accompanying the nomination of Dave Edwards as Reston's "Citizen of the Year" for 2010:

RCA Citizen of the Year 2010

Nomination Narrative for David Edwards

The year after receiving his Master’s Degree in City and Regional Planning from the University of North Carolina, Dave Edwards moved to Reston.  That was 1967.  He involved himself in his community and making it a better place from the beginning.  

In addition to the degree in Planning, Dave did undergraduate work in architecture at Miami of Ohio.  We shouldn’t be surprised that he focused his considerable talents on Reston community planning and design-related matters.  The years following his arrival were Reston’s formative years.  Dave Edwards played in key role in that shaping and is back playing an important role again as Reston enters a period of urban expansion.

Dave made his living working for Fairfax County, first as a county planner where his work included developing the county’s first comprehensive plan for the Upper Potomac Planning District, including Reston.  Subsequently, he worked as Deputy Director, then Executive Director of the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority.  His work included bringing to Reston dozens of businesses that have made this their home.

Meanwhile, he helped to organize and energize the new Reston Citizens Association founded in 1967 to protect the Robert Simon’s founding vision following his firing by Gulf Corporation.  Mr. Edwards served on the RCA Board from 1968 to 1972, including serving as Chair of RCA and Reston’s Planning and Zoning Committee.  In this capacity, he worked to develop the agreements with Fairfax County establishing the P & Z as the recognized voice of the community in reviewing proposals for new development in Reston.  Previously, development proposals went directly to the county staff and elected officials with community input limited to individuals appearing at county hearings.  P & Z established itself as a highly professional group that the developer took seriously and whose recommendations were usually accepted by the County.  It is hard to overstate the importance of this function and its impact on our community over the last 40-plus years.  Dave Edwards was a principal architect of this key institution.

In the early 1970s, Dave joined the Ad Hoc Committee to plan and design the Reston Community Center.  This Committee later became the new Center’s first Board of Governors.  As a member of the Ad Hoc Committee, it was Dave Edwards who conceived the financing mechanism for the Center, the creation of the Small Tax District 5.  This year (2010) the Community Center celebrates the 25^th anniversary of its founding.  It has expanded to Lake Anne and serves thousands of Reston citizens of all income levels with a wide array of cultural, recreational and educational programs.   We can, and should, thank Dave Edwards for his crucial role in shaping this special part of Reston.

Over the years, Dave has played scores of other roles serving Reston with no thought of personal reward.  As a volunteer for Reston Association, he provided input into the planning for South Lakes High School; served on the Reston Metro Access Group (RMAG); served on the RA Election Committee, 2004-2010; and, served as member and Vice Chair of the Transportation Committee.  Most recently, Dave has been an active participant in preparing a new Master Plan for Reston, a plan to guide development for a generation and to convert Reston from a suburban to urban community.  He has been a dynamic force within the citizens Reston 2020 group providing skilled, experienced input focused on assuring that Reston’s future development is up to his high standards for excellence in design and quality of life.  

Photo of the Day: Backyard Wildlife--A Young Red Fox

Too bad this was not videotaped. This fox was trailing closely to another larger fox. At first it appeared they were fighting, but it became clear that the parent was gently but firmly trying to nudge the juvenile away. The juvenile continued to trail close behind the parent, but it repeatedly shooed it away. It eventually came back, looking up at our birdfeeder, trying to figure out how to get to the birds or the feeder. It seemed he/she finally gave up and sat on our patio for a bit, then eventually moved on....

Notes from the RTF Steering Committee Meeting, January 11, Dick Stillson

The meeting was chaired by Patty Nicoson, Task Force chairman, and helped by DPZ staffers Heidi Merkel and Faheem Darab.  The Task Force members and alternates there were John Carter, Kohan Williams, Bill Penniman, Mark Looney, Robert Goudie, Greg Riegle, and Nick Bauer.  If I missed anyone, I apologize.  Several documents were passed out and Richard Lambert e-mailed me to say that they have been put on the web so I don’t have to scan them to pass them on to you all.  They are at: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/projects/reston/meetings_2011/meeting_jan11_steering_2011.htm

   As a kind of an introduction, Patty announced that the Phase I Metrorail construction was about 29 percent completed, and that the MWAA Board was considering alternatives to the underground station at the airport.  Bill Penniman also sent around his power point presentation on Wiehle Committee's vision and comments about an alternative put forward by Robert Goudie.  

            The first discussion was about the mission statement for the sub-committee, which includes a rather benign statement concerning implementation (the last bullet, of course). Even this was considered too much, especially the statement that “the Steering Committee would highlight mechanisms to implement these recommendations for Task Force considerations.”  Clearly, both Patty and Heidi thought this was important and wanted something about implementation in the Task Force report, and maybe in the revised Plan.  Several of the sub-committee members (at least Greg Riegle and Mark Looney) objected saying that this was too much for the Steering Committee. Heidi kind of compromised and mentioned the idea of a special implementation group from the Task Force.   I pressed her on that and she didn’t say what form an implementation group would take or when, but she definitely stated that this would be part of the Task Force work and the public (meaning us, I suppose) would be involved.  [Good for her—and Patty seemed to agree.]  Ultimately they voted and passed the mission statement with a revised paragraph on implementation.

            Then there was a discussion on the “vision statement” and the planning principles.  Yes, they still haven’t agreed on the principles.  Most of the discussion was wordsmithing and several members wanted to combine several of the points because they said similar things, for example, combining points discussing concentrating development at the transit stations and the principles of TOD.  They still didn’t agree and yet another draft will be written—by DPZ staff. 

            Bill Penniman, co-chair of the Wiehle Committee, gave a slide show presentation that was essentially a rebuttal to Robert Goudie’s views, apparently given in the previous meeting, that Wiehle Ave. should concentrate almost entirely on residential development and leave the commercial and public sector development to the Town Center.  Bill’s argument was that this would violate TOD principles which emphasized mixed use development in each station.  He argued that conceiving of Wiehle and Reston West as bedroom communities to feed Town Center would increase traffic in Reston and provide a very unbalanced development in the corridor.  His vision was more like a linear city along the metro line.   Robert argued back that he did not mean to imply only residential development at Wiehle—for example, he agreed with educational institutions at Wiehle—but that the Town Center should be the primary “downtown” of Reston.  John Carter suggested doing away with the phrase “downtown” for the Town Center.  [My view is that the Town Center should the primary focus for commercial and high-rise residential, but that there should be mixed development at all the stations—both of the extreme positions make little sense.]

            Finally there was a short discussion of the “Steering Sub-Committee Review Checklist,” a list of points the sub-committee should look at in reviewing each of the station sub-committees’ reports.  The idea is to establish a procedure with which the Steering Sub-Committee can reconcile and synthesize the various other sub-committees’ reports.  They didn’t get into any detail concerning the checklist, but agreed that it was important and would be a focus of the sub-committee’s work.

Dick Stillson